Garmin 496 - TAWS any good for Europe

Peter,

I am wondering whether the European terrain database is any good.


First, the nitpick ;-) It is not TAWS, but a terrain database. TAWS is
something certified.

Second: Both the units from Garmin (296 and up) and those from Lowrance
(Airmap 600c and 2000c) come in a European/International version with
the corresponding terrain. The 496 also offers a European obstacle
databse, which not all other units have. The Airmaps, OTOH, are easier
to use in both Europe and the US, if that is your interest.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Peter,

My question is really whether the terrain warning feature works in
Europe.

It does. See, for example, www.aeroversand.eu (yes, I'm biased...)


A lot of GPSs have a "terrain" database i.e. you can view primitive
elevation data. For for terrain warnings this needs to be high
resolution, and the unit needs to have input of the aircraft track and
speed so it can decide whether you are heading for a hill.

Hmm. I've only seen the latter in handheld GPS units with any terrain
data. The question of how reliable GPS derived altitude is, remains,
however. And the question whether you could actually rely on the
database containing every newly built tower or wind energy plant, too.

Why do you think the Airmaps are easier to use?

Not necessarily easier to use, but their database philosophy makes it
easier/cheaper to switch between continents. I'm not even sure if it is
possible to switch a Garmin at all. Oh, and the Airmaps are cheaper over
all, of course. Be aware also that the European Garmin 496 is lacking
the WX weather capability.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:



Not necessarily easier to use, but their database philosophy makes it
easier/cheaper to switch between continents. I'm not even sure if it is
possible to switch a Garmin at all. Oh, and the Airmaps are cheaper over
all, of course. Be aware also that the European Garmin 496 is lacking
the WX weather capability.


I can only speak for the Garmin 296. The terrain databases can be
switched in just a few minutes at a PC. Garmin gave away the three
terrain areas last year for the 296 and 396, so I have all three.

Peter,

From: Peter
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr,uk.rec.aviation
It's purely a last ditch measure against an undetected loss of
situational awareness. If loss of SA was not an issue, nobody would
pay for GPWS.

I agree. And for that, it is great.

GPS altitude is very accurate. I have 4-5 years behind a KLN94 and
it's always within 50-100ft of the known airfield elevation.

I've seen fluctuations much bigger than that, but the newer handhelds all
support WAAS and as such should also support EGNOS here in Europe, which
is basically the same thing. With that, the altitude should be definitely
in the range you quote.

Is that your shop, Thomas?

My wife's. I'm only consulting ;-)

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Peter wrote:

question is really whether the terrain warning feature works in
Europe.

A lot of GPSs have a "terrain" database i.e. you can view primitive
elevation data. For for terrain warnings this needs to be high
resolution, and the unit needs to have input of the aircraft track and
speed so it can decide whether you are heading for a hill.

The resolution in the Garmin handhelds is certainly adequate for a loss
of situational awareness. Where do you get the idea these data need to
be "high resolution" (whatever you mean by that)? Even in the best
Honeywell units the terrain is in something like 600 foot square grids.
I certainly wouldn't want to use that level of detail to build an
instrument approach procedure.

Soon after the Henderson NASCAR CFIT last year in Virginia I simulated
it with my Garmin 296 and received ample and valid warnings that would
have easily avoided the crash. I then transferred the track to
electronic 1:24,000 USGS topoquads and found the display to have been
faithful to the terrain on the topoquads to the extent needed to get out
of trouble before it is too late.

Garmin claims the terrain resolution is "10 times" better in the 496
than the 296/396. The photos Garmin has on their web site of the 496
terrain page don't look any better than the 296's.

Sam,

I can only speak for the Garmin 296. The terrain databases can be
switched in just a few minutes at a PC. Garmin gave away the three
terrain areas last year for the 296 and 396, so I have all three.


That sounds great. Still, if you load the US Jepp data into a European
unit, it will overwrite the European Jepp data. On returning, you'll
have to buy the European Jepp data again. At 35 $ a pop that's not too
much, but Lowrance allows you to keep both.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:
Sam,


I can only speak for the Garmin 296. The terrain databases can be
switched in just a few minutes at a PC. Garmin gave away the three
terrain areas last year for the 296 and 396, so I have all three.



That sounds great. Still, if you load the US Jepp data into a European
unit, it will overwrite the European Jepp data. On returning, you'll
have to buy the European Jepp data again. At 35 $ a pop that's not too
much, but Lowrance allows you to keep both.

Not correct. When you get back to the U.S., you simply reload the
Americas Jepp data and it overwrites the European (ATL) Jepp data. You
can switch between all three (AMR, PAC, and ATL) all you want, just like
with the terrain.

Peter wrote:

Thomas Borchert wrote:


I can only speak for the Garmin 296. The terrain databases can be
switched in just a few minutes at a PC. Garmin gave away the three
terrain areas last year for the 296 and 396, so I have all three.


That sounds great. Still, if you load the US Jepp data into a European
unit, it will overwrite the European Jepp data. On returning, you'll
have to buy the European Jepp data again. At 35 $ a pop that's not too
much, but Lowrance allows you to keep both.


The Avmap EKP IV seems better in this respect.

Initially, one can buy the US version for about $500 less, and then
one gets stung into paying another $500 or so for the European data.
But one can keep both sets; AFAIK the data is stored as plain files on
the CF cartridge and can be exchanged easily.

How much do Garmin charge for a year's worth of regular updates? I pay
about $250 for the KLN94.

$295, as I recall, for 56-day updates.

Peter wrote:

Sam Spade wrote:


Soon after the Henderson NASCAR CFIT last year in Virginia I simulated
it with my Garmin 296 and received ample and valid warnings that would
have easily avoided the crash. I then transferred the track to
electronic 1:24,000 USGS topoquads and found the display to have been
faithful to the terrain on the topoquads to the extent needed to get out
of trouble before it is too late.

Garmin claims the terrain resolution is "10 times" better in the 496
than the 296/396. The photos Garmin has on their web site of the 496
terrain page don't look any better than the 296's.


Is the above correct for Europe? I don't doubt it is for the USA.


Beats me. I also used my 296 to simulate a commuter crash in Australia.
The TAWS alerts would have keep me alive. I also did what the crew
did and it showed me dead.

Peter,

Is the above correct for Europe? I don't doubt it is for the USA.


Yes.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)