GPS 430 or 480?

Just looked at my approach plates. Very few have NDB approaches, some are VOR
DME, some require ADF. More and more now are GPS.
Since I can use the GPS instead of DME for Some VOR approaches, is it not wise
(prudent)
to get an IFR certified GPS now?
Should it be a Garmin 430 or a 480? The cost of the 480 is about 2 grand more,
but I could use it for ILS approaches.
My ADF is useless and I am contemplating a GPS in the place on the panel.
I have never flown a GPS approach.
My finances are low, but my life does have a high value. So says the MRS.
You can email or put your thoughts and suggestion here.
Hank 172 driver

(Hankal) wrote:
Just looked at my approach plates. Very few have NDB approaches, some are VOR
DME, some require ADF. More and more now are GPS.
Since I can use the GPS instead of DME for Some VOR approaches, is it not wise
(prudent)
to get an IFR certified GPS now?
Should it be a Garmin 430 or a 480? The cost of the 480 is about 2 grand more,
but I could use it for ILS approaches.

Can't you fly an ILS with either the 430 or the 480?

Here's my personal opinion on the state of IFR GA avionics today.

1) ADF is dead.

2) DME is dead.

3) GPS is the way to go.

4) You need some sort of backup if the GPS goes TU. A conventional
NAV/COM with GS driving its own CDI means you can get vectors to an ILS
if you need to. My club has been gravitating towards the SL-30 as our
standard #2 NAV/COM, but you don't need to be that fancy.

For better or worse, Garmin pretty much has a lock on the market today.
Assuming your budget precludes the 530 (gotta love that big screen), the
only real choice is between the 430 and the 480. My personal opinion is
that on technical merits, the 480 is the better box, but the big open
question is which of the two will Garmin continue to support in the
future. Garmin's not talking, but my guess (and it's really just a
guess) is that the 430 is going to be retired soon.

My ADF is useless and I am contemplating a GPS in the place on the panel.
I have never flown a GPS approach.

Whatever box you buy, there will be a learning curve, and you had better
budget some learning time to master the software on whatever box you
install. But once you do, flying a GPS approach is much easier than
just about anything else (except perhaps vectors to an ILS).

On 10/26/04 8:14 PM, in article
, "Hankal"
wrote:

Just looked at my approach plates. Very few have NDB approaches, some are VOR
DME, some require ADF. More and more now are GPS.
Since I can use the GPS instead of DME for Some VOR approaches, is it not wise
(prudent)
to get an IFR certified GPS now?
Should it be a Garmin 430 or a 480? The cost of the 480 is about 2 grand more,
but I could use it for ILS approaches.
My ADF is useless and I am contemplating a GPS in the place on the panel.
I have never flown a GPS approach.
My finances are low, but my life does have a high value. So says the MRS.
You can email or put your thoughts and suggestion here.
Hank 172 driver

I fly with a 430 and it's IFR certified. I don't know what the future holds
for it as far as Garmin is concerned, but it certainly does everything I
could ask of it. It's reasonably simple to operate with a little study and
in truth, I can't think of a bad thing to say about it.
Standard disclaimer about not working for or having any other affiliation
with Garmin applies.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino
Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

ADF and DME are not dead. Lose GPS enroute IFR and what else do you have?
I have used regularly in my flying a CNX remoted to an MX-20. SL30 is
second Nav/Com. Two VOR`s with separate glide slopes. DME remotes to SL30.
RMI presents information from ADF on double needle and Nav1, Nav2, or GPS to
single needle.
So guess what happens? In turbulence I knock off the only knob on the CNX
that selects radio frequencies. The shaft that the knob fits over is bent
and will not turn. That is with how much force I hit the panel with my hand.
The airplane immediately loses Nav1, Com1, and GPS. Garmin says that this
has never happened before. I am left on a multileg flightplan with VOR, DME
and ADF. I have a handheld Garmin GPS 196 but you may have difficulty
programming it when aircraft control takes all your attention. I could not
use the hand held GPS at that time.
I flew an ILS approach with DME and ADF assistance. No emergency. No
question of outcome.

The dilemma of these boxes is that while they save tremendous panel space,
you give up redundancy.
I am not proCNX80 and antiGNS430. They are simply 2 different boxes with 2
different missions and 2 different learning curves. And we keep getting
another curve to learn with the CNX as Garmin continually modifies and
improves and changes and fixes the software. When they do this, the menus
change. They nested menus. This means you have to unlearn and relearn how
the unit operates.
One of my friends always laughs and says " When you live on the cutting
edge, you sure bleed a lot".

I would choose the CNX based on your type of flying and not because it is
the hot new box and somebody else has one. It has a very steep learning
curve(expensive). But if you fly serious IFR and you are familiar with
FMS`s, it must be considered.
I think the unspoken concern I share is that this is getting way too
complicated for casual use. And is this technology going to get any easier
or intuitive in operation in the future?
I also believe that when a company sells ANY new technology unit that
training must be made available from that company. How many of us really
use the navigational potential of any of our equipment? If you can afford
the box and risk the safety of your flight on the outcome of the use of the
box, you can afford the training. Flying has never been cheap and it is not
getting any cheaper tomorrow.

"Hankal" wrote in message
...
Just looked at my approach plates. Very few have NDB approaches, some are
VOR
DME, some require ADF. More and more now are GPS.
Since I can use the GPS instead of DME for Some VOR approaches, is it not
wise
(prudent)
to get an IFR certified GPS now?
Should it be a Garmin 430 or a 480? The cost of the 480 is about 2 grand
more,
but I could use it for ILS approaches.
My ADF is useless and I am contemplating a GPS in the place on the panel.
I have never flown a GPS approach.
My finances are low, but my life does have a high value. So says the MRS.
You can email or put your thoughts and suggestion here.
Hank 172 driver

I wrestled with that same concern, but I overcame it.
For 'casual use' there's Direct-To, and that's not complicated at all.
With the new GPS gear, we can climb the learning curve gradually,
using one new feature at a time, after becoming comfortable with each.
The CNX-80/GNS-430 is especially rich in available features,
but nobody says we have to use all of them in the beginning.
---JRC---

"Steven DalPra" wrote in message =
news
=20
-- Many good points snipped --
=20
I think the unspoken concern I share is that this is getting way too=20
complicated for casual use.

If you mainly want a DME/ADF replacement and to use for occasional RNAV
approaches, do you really need either the 430 or the 480? You can buy a used
IFR GPS for less than half of what either of those boxes cost new and get
all of that stuff and save some money to solve other problems. Neither box
will do you any good if the plane is on the ground because you don't have
the money to repair a cylinder.

If you're thinking about throwing real money around, why not buy a used 430
and get yourself a GTX-330 and get TIS while you're at it? That's useful in
VFR, too. As for support, the GNS-430 base is too big for Garmin to not
support. But, if you're buying new, I can't see any reason to not buy the
480.

I would not want to have only one NAV/COM radio for serious IFR. If they're
tearing up the wiring have them put a connector so you can plug your
handheld COM into the external antenna- you'll get much better reception.
You do have handheld radios, don't you? My #1 oh-$#@! IFR scenario is an
electrical failure, particularly in a middle-aged 172. Handheld COM and GPS
running on batteries are the best insurance.

-cwk.

"Hankal" wrote in message
...
Just looked at my approach plates. Very few have NDB approaches, some are
VOR
DME, some require ADF. More and more now are GPS.
Since I can use the GPS instead of DME for Some VOR approaches, is it not
wise
(prudent)
to get an IFR certified GPS now?
Should it be a Garmin 430 or a 480? The cost of the 480 is about 2 grand
more,
but I could use it for ILS approaches.
My ADF is useless and I am contemplating a GPS in the place on the panel.
I have never flown a GPS approach.
My finances are low, but my life does have a high value. So says the MRS.
You can email or put your thoughts and suggestion here.
Hank 172 driver

If you're thinking about throwing real money around, why not buy a used 430
and get yourself a GTX-330 and get TIS while you're at it? That's useful in
VFR, too. As for support, the GNS-430 base is too big for Garmin to not
support. But, if you're buying new, I can't see any reason to not buy the
480.

I had to buy used, never know who abused the equipment.
Would love to get the 480. Never know when I get to my destination and have to
fly the approach. Sure I can fly VOR or ILS
but some require GPS and others DME.
I have neither.

C Kingsbury wrote:
If you mainly want a DME/ADF replacement and to use for occasional RNAV
approaches, do you really need either the 430 or the 480? You can buy a used
IFR GPS for less than half of what either of those boxes cost new and get
all of that stuff and save some money to solve other problems. Neither box
will do you any good if the plane is on the ground because you don't have
the money to repair a cylinder.


Don't be swayed by unit acquisition cost alone.
The installation and certification will be a large chunk of the initial
expense, whether an older or new model. They will also both cost about
the same in database updates. So the total cost of ownership of an
older GPS is really not that much less, for MUCH less capability.
That's the reason they're so cheap ;-)

On 27 Oct 2004 23:31:54 GMT, (Hankal) wrote:

If you're thinking about throwing real money around, why not buy a used 430
and get yourself a GTX-330 and get TIS while you're at it? That's useful in
VFR, too. As for support, the GNS-430 base is too big for Garmin to not
support. But, if you're buying new, I can't see any reason to not buy the
480.

I had to buy used, never know who abused the equipment.
Would love to get the 480. Never know when I get to my destination and have to
fly the approach. Sure I can fly VOR or ILS
but some require GPS and others DME.
I have neither.


Both the GNS-430 and GNS-480 have GPS/ILS/VOR/Com all in the same box.
Would not be different in that regard for either of them. 480
apparently currentyl has WAAS capability and this is supposed to be an
upgrade for the 430. There are many other differences between them
but they both have the same basic capabilities. The only current
difference in approaches you could fly would be ones requiring WAAS.

"SR" wrote in message =
...
=20
=20
Both the GNS-430 and GNS-480 have GPS/ILS/VOR/Com all in the same box.
Would not be different in that regard for either of them. 480
apparently currentyl has WAAS capability and this is supposed to be an
upgrade for the 430. There are many other differences between them
but they both have the same basic capabilities. The only current
difference in approaches you could fly would be ones requiring WAAS.

I think the difference between having vertical guidance for GNS-480 =
approaches,
and not having it with GNS-430 approaches is a HUGE difference.
It's even bigger than ILS approaches versus Localizer-only approaches.

The 430 cannot get that capability without being recertified under =
TSO-C146a,
and the 430 hardware would need to be replaced to achieve that =
performance level.
I can't imagine Garmin upgrading the 430 now that they own the 480 =
design.
---JRC---