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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Garmin Behind the Curve on WAAS GPS VNAV Approaches
"Scott Moore" wrote in message ... Speaking only for myself, its pretty damm confusing exactly what would be done with WAAS even if implemented. Garmins' other units that accept WAAS is now implemented and IFR approved as of the past week. If a receiver were approved for WAAS approaches, then TODAY you could use VNAV/LNAV miniums on GPS RNAV approaches instead of LNAV minimums. Presumably (though I am not certain) a VNAV/LNAV GPS RNAV approach would be considered a precision approach. UPSAT's CNX80 web page touts the airports you have access to today with WAAS; yet the version of the POH supplement posted on their site says in the legal fineprint that precision approaches are NOT permitted. So I am not certain if you can or cannot fly VNAV/LNAV GPS approach mininums TODAY on a CNX-80. What I would like to see from Garmin is a controlled descent option on non-precision GPS approaches, which would be perfectly legal to implement right now (because it is inside the "dive and drive" If you want to do this as a backup to other navigation, you can do this now with the VNAV function on the Garmin 430/530, albeit not yet with WAAS. Nonetheless, there is a big question whether this will make sense for an approach not explicitly designed as a precision approach. Many non-precision approaches have a missed approach point from which a suitable straight-in landing cannot be made; so you could well have a controlled descent to the middle of the field an then in turn have to circle. -- Richard Kaplan, CFII www.flyimc.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Richard Kaplan wrote: "Scott Moore" wrote in message ... Speaking only for myself, its pretty damm confusing exactly what would be done with WAAS even if implemented. Garmins' other units that accept WAAS is now implemented and IFR approved as of the past week. If a receiver were approved for WAAS approaches, then TODAY you could use VNAV/LNAV miniums on GPS RNAV approaches instead of LNAV minimums. Presumably (though I am not certain) a VNAV/LNAV GPS RNAV approach would be considered a precision approach. UPSAT's CNX80 web page touts the airports you have access to today with WAAS; yet the version of the POH supplement posted on their site says in the legal fineprint that precision approaches are NOT permitted. So I am not certain if you can or cannot fly VNAV/LNAV GPS approach mininums TODAY on a CNX-80. I wouldn't be so certain of that. Today's VNAV minimums are predicated on IFR-certified Baro VNAV equipment, not WAAS. WAAS approaches have yet to appear from the FAA |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
So does the CNX-80 meet the requirement today? Is it "WAAS equipment
approved for precision approach"? Mike MU-2 "Lockheed employee" Mississippi@ home.com wrote in message ... I have a Jeppesen briefing bulletin (DEN 00-A) that states: LNAV/VNAV must have WAAS equipment approved for precision approach, or RNP-0.3 system based on GPS or DME/DME, with an IFR approach approved Baro-VNAV system. It appears that either is suitable for going to VNAV minimums On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 05:47:50 -0700, wrote: Richard Kaplan wrote: "Scott Moore" wrote in message ... Speaking only for myself, its pretty damm confusing exactly what would be done with WAAS even if implemented. Garmins' other units that accept WAAS is now implemented and IFR approved as of the past week. If a receiver were approved for WAAS approaches, then TODAY you could use VNAV/LNAV miniums on GPS RNAV approaches instead of LNAV minimums. Presumably (though I am not certain) a VNAV/LNAV GPS RNAV approach would be considered a precision approach. UPSAT's CNX80 web page touts the airports you have access to today with WAAS; yet the version of the POH supplement posted on their site says in the legal fineprint that precision approaches are NOT permitted. So I am not certain if you can or cannot fly VNAV/LNAV GPS approach mininums TODAY on a CNX-80. I wouldn't be so certain of that. Today's VNAV minimums are predicated on IFR-certified Baro VNAV equipment, not WAAS. WAAS approaches have yet to appear from the FAA |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message ... So does the CNX-80 meet the requirement today? Is it "WAAS equipment approved for precision approach"? Why are you asking a sock a technical question, Mike? Uspat spent their own money to develop the idea of merging pressure altitude and a subset of the TAWS database and for that they deserve the market. At least until the other manufacturers catch up. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
I don't know if "behind" is the right word. Garmin has had WAAS on numerous
products for a couple of years now. There are valid reasons to try to have the best product on the market instead of the first product. Mike MU-2 "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 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message ... I don't know if "behind" is the right word. Garmin has had WAAS on numerous products for a couple of years now. There are valid reasons to try to have the best product on the market instead of the first product. Garmin is behind because Upsat did the sensor merging on their own initiative. I stood right there and watched the Transport Directorate say "no" to the idea and FAA's chief scientist start running numbers in his head. UPS was on the phone before the smoke break ended. WAAS alone could not add any new services to existing GPS. John P. Tarver, MS/PE |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"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. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
My own 5 euro cents: Garmin missed the boat on one "minor" point with both the GNS430 and the GNS530... for something that is purportedly a "fully integrated comm and navigation system" where is the DME? (Required for Airways certification). GPS derrived distances are not DME, and in Europe are not acceptable as a substitute. As a result, a VERY nice panel with a couple of GNS530 is still not airways approved unless there is a DME (doesn't necessarily have to be slaved), and hence another 1 radio unit (height) taken up on the panel. If I'm not mistaken, the UPS kit has both DME and transponder integrated... I personally prefer the garmin kit though. Could the engineers at Garmin catch up with everyone else please? /tongue in cheek Leland '71 PA28R-200 On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 07:48:57 -0400, John Mireley wrote: Richard Kaplan wrote: 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. Garmin lobbied the FAA on the final specs for WAAS so their current processors could meet the spec. They lost. They now have to replace the processors in order to meet the spec. I think the issue was that they could get 3 updates per second and the spec was for 5. This is from my memory of an FAA session at the Great Lakes Aviation Conference back in January. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
This is my understanding too. In order for the box to drive the glideslope
needle, the altitudes have to be in the database. Currently I don't think that they are.. Mike MU-2 "Scott Moore" wrote in message ... Richard Kaplan wrote: "Scott Moore" wrote in message ... Speaking only for myself, its pretty damm confusing exactly what would be done with WAAS even if implemented. Garmins' other units that accept WAAS is now implemented and IFR approved as of the past week. If a receiver were approved for WAAS approaches, then TODAY you could use VNAV/LNAV miniums on GPS RNAV approaches instead of LNAV minimums. Presumably (though I am not certain) a VNAV/LNAV GPS RNAV approach would be considered a precision approach. UPSAT's CNX80 web page touts the airports you have access to today with WAAS; yet the version of the POH supplement posted on their site says in the legal fineprint that precision approaches are NOT permitted. So I am not certain if you can or cannot fly VNAV/LNAV GPS approach mininums TODAY on a CNX-80. What I would like to see from Garmin is a controlled descent option on non-precision GPS approaches, which would be perfectly legal to implement right now (because it is inside the "dive and drive" If you want to do this as a backup to other navigation, you can do this now with the VNAV function on the Garmin 430/530, albeit not yet with WAAS. I was talking about driving the glideslope needle. Pretty much by definition, WAAS is going to have to drive the needle to be a precision device. On my 430, the glideslope needle is driven (obviously) by the box, and when Garmin talks about "WAAS compatibility" I have to presume that it means ability to drive the glideslope from the GPS side. What else would it mean ? We can add boxes to make WAAS work ? Anybody could say that. -- For most men, true happiness can only be achieved with a woman. Also for most men, true happiness can only be achieved without a woman. Sharp minds have noted that these two rules tend to conflict..... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|