Are Garmin shipping the GNS430 with WAAS yet ?

--
Roy
N5804F - PA28-181

Roy Page wrote:

> Are Garmin shipping the GNS430 with WAAS yet ?

Another ? - Anyone know how much the WAAS upgrade for a GNS430 might be?
Even a ballpark estimate.

--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-IA Student-Arrow Buying Student

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth
with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there
you will always long to return"
- Leonardo Da Vinci

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

Jack, it seems to me that no one from Garmin is saying much about the
availability of the WAAS upgrade either.
They did indicate in early 2004 that the upgrade would be available in Oct
2004 and would involve hardware and software with a cost around $1,500.
Unless I have been asleep, Garmin missed their Oct 2004 date.
They appear to be busy with other upgrades for the 530 and leaving their 430
loyal customers out in the cold.
I need to decide very soon which unit to fit, so I am now supposing that the
GNS480 is the way to go for my new installation.
I am surprised that Bendix have not announced another certified all in one
box WAAS enabled to provide some competition for Garmin.

--
Roy
N5804F - PA28-181


"Jack Allison" > wrote in message
...
> Roy Page wrote:
>
>> Are Garmin shipping the GNS430 with WAAS yet ?
>
> Another ? - Anyone know how much the WAAS upgrade for a GNS430 might be?
> Even a ballpark estimate.
>
> --
> Jack Allison
> PP-ASEL-IA Student-Arrow Buying Student
>
> "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth
> with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there
> you will always long to return"
> - Leonardo Da Vinci
>
> (Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

Jack Allison > writes:

> Roy Page wrote:
>
> > Are Garmin shipping the GNS430 with WAAS yet ?
>
> Another ? - Anyone know how much the WAAS upgrade for a GNS430 might
> be? Even a ballpark estimate.

Garmin said it would be $1500.

-jav

Yes, they are, at least to cutomers who own UPSAT CNX-80s. My club is
in the process of sending in the CNX-80 units we own to Garmin and
having them upgraded to GNS-480s through a sof****e upgrade, which
enables WAAS and LNAV/VNAV/LPV approaches among other things, and a new
front plate which replaces the "Apollo/UPSAT CNX-80" with "Garmin
GNS-480".

I would think that new buyers would be getting the same version.


In article et>, Roy
Page > wrote:

> Are Garmin shipping the GNS430 with WAAS yet ?

All I know is that I am not willing to learn the 480's interface, and
neither are most of the folks around here.

We are all waiting for the 430 units to start shipping or upgrading. I am
thinking I will put a 430 in my old Ovation to replace the king DME/NAV
units when the WAAS is ready, and then save my pennies for a Glass cockpit,
or for the next money pit which I am hoping I will build myself.


"Roy Page" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Are Garmin shipping the GNS430 with WAAS yet ?
>
> --
> Roy
> N5804F - PA28-181
>

Dude > wrote:

> We are all waiting for the 430 units to start shipping or upgrading.

A couple of months ago I called Garmin and asked them to speculate on the
availability of the WAAS upgrade for the GNS-430 and a tech told me June or
July 2005 (in the US).

My local avionics shop claimed that they had heard this date, too.

FWIW...

--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:04:37 -0500, Tom Fleischman
> wrote:

>Yes, they are, at least to cutomers who own UPSAT CNX-80s. My club is
>in the process of sending in the CNX-80 units we own to Garmin and
>having them upgraded to GNS-480s through a sof****e upgrade, which
>enables WAAS and LNAV/VNAV/LPV approaches among other things, and a new
>front plate which replaces the "Apollo/UPSAT CNX-80" with "Garmin
>GNS-480".
>
>I would think that new buyers would be getting the same version.
>
>
>In article et>, Roy
>Page > wrote:
>
>> Are Garmin shipping the GNS430 with WAAS yet ?


Hmm:

>OP: Are Garmin shipping the GNS430 with WAAS yet ?

>Tom: Yes, they are, at least to cutomers who own UPSAT CNX-80s.

So does that mean that since I have a CNX80 I can get Garmin to ship me a
WAAS enabled GNS430? Perhaps I can use it as a backup :-))


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

In article >, Ron Rosenfeld
> wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:04:37 -0500, Tom Fleischman
> > wrote:
>
<SNIP>
> >OP: Are Garmin shipping the GNS430 with WAAS yet ?
>
> >Tom: Yes, they are, at least to cutomers who own UPSAT CNX-80s.
>
> So does that mean that since I have a CNX80 I can get Garmin to ship me a
> WAAS enabled GNS430? Perhaps I can use it as a backup :-))

You have to send your CNX-80 in to Garmin. They change the firmware,
update the software, put a new face plate on it and ship it back to you
as a GNS-480, with WAAS enabled.

In article >, Peter R.
> wrote:

> Dude > wrote:
>
> > We are all waiting for the 430 units to start shipping or upgrading.
>
> A couple of months ago I called Garmin and asked them to speculate on the
> availability of the WAAS upgrade for the GNS-430 and a tech told me June or
> July 2005 (in the US).
>
> My local avionics shop claimed that they had heard this date, too.
>
> FWIW...

I wouldn't hold my breath.

It seems to me that the reason they bought out Apollo/UPSAT in the
first place was so that they wouldn't have to really tackle the problem
of providing an upgrade for the 430/530. They were months behind on
that schedule a year and a half ago. The last thing they want to do is
to resurrect that old chestnut. They want to sell 480's now and you can
bet dollars to doughnuts that they don't want to compete with
themselves.

The GNS-480 a superior product anyway. Maybe they will take 430/530's
in trade. :-)

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:06:58 -0500, Tom Fleischman
> wrote:

>You have to send your CNX-80 in to Garmin. They change the firmware,
>update the software, put a new face plate on it and ship it back to you
>as a GNS-480, with WAAS enabled.

I think you missed the (hopefully humorous) point I was trying to make.

The OP asked about getting a WAAS enabled *430*.
You said they were available to owners of *CNX80*'s.

So I was hoping to get a WAAS enabled *430* (for $1500 perhaps), as I
already have a WAAS enabled CNX80!

And they did not change the faceplate -- it still says CNX80.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

It has nothing to do with the AT aquisition and everything to do with
availible resources and certification. It took forever to get TAWS
certified too.

Mike
MU-2


"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in
message
news:280320051013571550%bodhijunkoneeightyeightjun ...
> In article >, Peter R.
> > wrote:
>
>> Dude > wrote:
>>
>> > We are all waiting for the 430 units to start shipping or upgrading.
>>
>> A couple of months ago I called Garmin and asked them to speculate on the
>> availability of the WAAS upgrade for the GNS-430 and a tech told me June
>> or
>> July 2005 (in the US).
>>
>> My local avionics shop claimed that they had heard this date, too.
>>
>> FWIW...
>
> I wouldn't hold my breath.
>
> It seems to me that the reason they bought out Apollo/UPSAT in the
> first place was so that they wouldn't have to really tackle the problem
> of providing an upgrade for the 430/530. They were months behind on
> that schedule a year and a half ago. The last thing they want to do is
> to resurrect that old chestnut. They want to sell 480's now and you can
> bet dollars to doughnuts that they don't want to compete with
> themselves.
>
> The GNS-480 a superior product anyway. Maybe they will take 430/530's
> in trade. :-)

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:37:51 -0500, Tom Fleischman
> wrote:

>The vertical guidance on the GPS approaches is awesome.

Concur. That really blew me away the first time I did the GPS 15 KEPM
approach. And it's just a plain LNAV approach!


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Dude wrote:

> All I know is that I am not willing to learn the 480's interface, and
> neither are most of the folks around here.

Why? It's certainly different, and I'd expect a learning curve. But if I
were given a chance to swap the 430s I fly (in 4 club aircraft) for 480s,
I'd leap at it. Ignoring the feature differences, there's one UI
difference - entering flight plans just as they're described as IFR
clearances - that's *extremely* desirable in my opinion.

But I'm curious why you disagree.

- Andrew

"Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
online.com...
> Dude wrote:
>
>> All I know is that I am not willing to learn the 480's interface, and
>> neither are most of the folks around here.
>
> Why? It's certainly different, and I'd expect a learning curve. But if I
> were given a chance to swap the 430s I fly (in 4 club aircraft) for 480s,
> I'd leap at it. Ignoring the feature differences, there's one UI
> difference - entering flight plans just as they're described as IFR
> clearances - that's *extremely* desirable in my opinion.
>
> But I'm curious why you disagree.
>
> - Andrew
>

I have never used one, but the word on the street and in the press is that
the interface is MUCH more different than that. Reviews of the units have
not been flattering about the interface. If the FPL was the ONLY
difference, I would be willing to go that route.

In my search for a used 430, I have heard too much talk that a new panel
mount is just around the corner though. I am going to hold off until after
OSH no matter what.

Dude wrote:

> I have never used one, but the word on the street and in the press is that
> the interface is MUCH more different than that. Reviews of the units have
> not been flattering about the interface.

Really? Tom Benenson in Flying has spoken well about it, as did someone in
one of the more recent IFRs. These are just the most recent; I've seen
other praise further in the past.

I don't recall reading of anyone complaining about the UI in the press.
Have you a reference; I'd like to see the specifics of the complaint(s).
Like you, I've not tried one.

[...]
> In my search for a used 430, I have heard too much talk that a new panel
> mount is just around the corner though.

From Garmin or someone else? I've been wondering by Bendix hasn't an entry
in that market (unless I've missed it).

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon > wrote:
> I don't recall reading of anyone complaining about the [GNS-480] UI in
> the press. Have you a reference; I'd like to see the specifics of the
> complaint(s). Like you, I've not tried one.

There are certainly things wrong with the CNX-80/GNS-480 UI (I've been
using it for a couple of years now). The biggest problem is that it's too
modal; there's too many pages hidden two or three layers deep and sometimes
you know what you want to do, but you just can't remember how to get to the
page where you can do it.

I think it also suffers a bit from trying to do too much. The ability to
have a blind transponder is nice, but hardly necessary. There's a
dedicated button (and a little bit of screen real-estate) devoted to
xponder operations; they could have been devoted to something else.
Perhaps a dedicated FPL button instead of an FPL soft key? I think that
would have made the whole box (a little) easier to use.

There's a whole page of fancy timer functions, but most of the time I just
want a button that I can hit RIGHT NOW that starts counting down from 1
minute (without interrupting the flight plan editing I was in the middle of
doing).

Overall, I like the box, but it definately has a steep learning curve, and
some UI warts. It really could have been a lot better with some better
usability testing before it shipped.

These are all complex boxes, and they're getting more complex as they add
features (interfaces to weather, traffic, transponder, fuel computers, CO
detectors, etc, etc, etc). Hopefully some of what we've learned about UI
design in the past 25 years will start to trickle down to the avionics
market and things will not only get better, but more standardized.

"Dude" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> I have never used one, but the word on the street and in the press is that
> the interface is MUCH more different than that. Reviews of the units have
> not been flattering about the interface. If the FPL was the ONLY
> difference, I would be willing to go that route.

I think I know which article you are referring to, but it was based on a
test that was not conducted very well (the people tested already had
familiarity with the Garmin product but not the UPS-AT). Since that time,
in head-to-head tests I believe the 480 was picked overwhelmingly over the
430.

I started this thread and thank all of the guys who have provided input.
It seems to me that Garmin are in no rush whatsoever to get the GNS430
product ready to ship with WAAS enabled.
From the hearsay that is banded around, all that is forthcoming is a
possible indication that something may happen in 2005.
Garmin could have easily, by now, have issued a firm commitment to the
GNS430 and shipping them with enabled WAAS.
But I think that it is fact that no formal assurances have been issued at
all.

The GNS480 is available, and without assurances about the GNS430 Garmin are
indicating that the 430 will soon be shown on the discontinued list.
What Garmin are doing is typically good marketing, say nothing, keep smiling
and slowly let the product die !

I feel that any difficultly with using the GNS480 interface probably is just
a matter of familiarity.
Those users who learnt to operate GPS units via the GPS90/92, GPS195/6 hand
helds will have found the GNS430 to be a natural progression.
Therefore being easy for them to gain full control.

I can play tunes on pretty much all of the Garmin aviation hand held units.
Last week I sat down with the GNS480 simulator and admit that I had to go
back and read some parts of the manual.
But having done so, felt at home reasonably quickly. Also the use of
softkeys is an improvement over the GNS430.
I am sure that the lack of competition from Bendix [or others] is pretty
much leaving Garmin always in the Left Seat.
I can't wait till Oshkosh to see what Garmin might announce, so I am taking
the bull by the horns and will fit the GNS480 in my Archer.


--
Roy
N5804F - PA28-181 Piper Archer II


"Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
online.com...
> Dude wrote:
>
>> I have never used one, but the word on the street and in the press is
>> that
>> the interface is MUCH more different than that. Reviews of the units
>> have
>> not been flattering about the interface.
>
> Really? Tom Benenson in Flying has spoken well about it, as did someone
> in
> one of the more recent IFRs. These are just the most recent; I've seen
> other praise further in the past.
>
> I don't recall reading of anyone complaining about the UI in the press.
> Have you a reference; I'd like to see the specifics of the complaint(s).
> Like you, I've not tried one.
>
> [...]
>> In my search for a used 430, I have heard too much talk that a new panel
>> mount is just around the corner though.
>
> From Garmin or someone else? I've been wondering by Bendix hasn't an
> entry
> in that market (unless I've missed it).
>
> - Andrew
>

Roy Smith wrote:

/snip/ The ability to
> have a blind transponder is nice, but hardly necessary. There's a
> dedicated button (and a little bit of screen real-estate) devoted to
> xponder operations; they could have been devoted to something else.
> Perhaps a dedicated FPL button instead of an FPL soft key? I think that
> would have made the whole box (a little) easier to use.
/snip/

Roy,

So, even if you don't have a remote xponder hooked up, the screen
*still* dedicates some space to that function? I'd hoped they would
switch that off if you didn't use it.

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane
N92054

In article >,
Scott Skylane > wrote:

> Roy Smith wrote:
>
> /snip/ The ability to
> > have a blind transponder is nice, but hardly necessary. There's a
> > dedicated button (and a little bit of screen real-estate) devoted to
> > xponder operations; they could have been devoted to something else.
> > Perhaps a dedicated FPL button instead of an FPL soft key? I think that
> > would have made the whole box (a little) easier to use.
> /snip/
>
> Roy,
>
> So, even if you don't have a remote xponder hooked up, the screen
> *still* dedicates some space to that function? I'd hoped they would
> switch that off if you didn't use it.

Well, no, the screen real-estate does get reused for something else (UTC
clock in the one I fly with; for all I know, it's configurable), but the
key is still wasted. Panel real-estate is at a premium on these things; it
seems such a shame to waste a dedicated key on something which you don't
have installed (if you press it, you get a "Key Inoperative" message.

Most of the magazines tend to put a strong polish on the products unless
they are just pitiful (in which case they seem to just ignore them).

When I read the same article you quoted, I got negative impressions of the
UI.



"Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
online.com...
> Dude wrote:
>
>> I have never used one, but the word on the street and in the press is
>> that
>> the interface is MUCH more different than that. Reviews of the units
>> have
>> not been flattering about the interface.
>
> Really? Tom Benenson in Flying has spoken well about it, as did someone
> in
> one of the more recent IFRs. These are just the most recent; I've seen
> other praise further in the past.
>
> I don't recall reading of anyone complaining about the UI in the press.
> Have you a reference; I'd like to see the specifics of the complaint(s).
> Like you, I've not tried one.
>
> [...]
>> In my search for a used 430, I have heard too much talk that a new panel
>> mount is just around the corner though.
>
> From Garmin or someone else? I've been wondering by Bendix hasn't an
> entry
> in that market (unless I've missed it).
>
> - Andrew
>

Dude,

> We are all waiting for the 430 units to start shipping or upgrading.
>

We are? To fly how many WAAS-dependent approaches in IMC per year in
your personal flying, exactly?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Andrew,

> Tom Benenson in Flying has spoken well about it,
>

He's got one, hasn't he?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 14:34:45 -0400, Roy Smith > wrote:

>Overall, I like the box, but it definately has a steep learning curve, and
>some UI warts. It really could have been a lot better with some better
>usability testing before it shipped.
>
There is definitely a learning curve in the box, just like there is
one in the 530 box, but I think that you could learn the functions
fairly quickly on a long VFR flight and just playing with it. That
seems to work best for me. I have both the GNS 480 and a 530 in two
different airplanes, and there are features that I like about each and
there are features that I dislike about each. I have both there
simulators on the computer here at home and try to navigate through
the system sitting at the desk, but the process is slow and painful
when you try and dial something in. I see way too many people use
just the direct button on their GPS and go. I think it is such a
waste of technology when you have something sitting in front of you
and you don't use it. My biggest grip about both systems is that I
cant pre-program a flight plan on the home computer and then download
it into the plane. It would sure save a lot of time in the cockpit
IMHO.


Scott D

To email remove spamcatcher

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Dude,
>
>> We are all waiting for the 430 units to start shipping or upgrading.
>>
>
> We are? To fly how many WAAS-dependent approaches in IMC per year in
> your personal flying, exactly?
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
>

Yes, we are. We like gagets.

Mike
MU-2

Thomas Borchert > writes:

> Dude,
>
> > We are all waiting for the 430 units to start shipping or upgrading.
> >
>
> We are? To fly how many WAAS-dependent approaches in IMC per year in
> your personal flying, exactly?

Actually, if the WAAS upgrade brings along LNAV, I might just spring
for the upgrade.

-jav

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Andrew,
>
>> Tom Benenson in Flying has spoken well about it,
>>
>
> He's got one, hasn't he?
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)


Which brings up an excellent point. It seems we have all a lot invested in
our stuff, and we don't want what we got getting a bad name because we
probably will need to sell it in a few years. We even tend to do it without
knowing we do. I think it is a self defense mechanism so we don't have to
beat ourselves up for making a bad buy.

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Dude,
>
>> We are all waiting for the 430 units to start shipping or upgrading.
>>
>
> We are? To fly how many WAAS-dependent approaches in IMC per year in
> your personal flying, exactly?
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
>

As many as possible. I didn't buy a plane to travel from one overcrowded
international airport to another. And even when I do, I want it to be as
safe as possible. They don't have ILS everywhere, the GPS approaches are
safer and simpler to fly, and the more of us that have the recievers, the
more airports will be putting in the approaches.

In fact, the added value that WAAS can bring to GA could end up paying for
the unit when our planes appreciate.

Dude,

> I think it is a self defense mechanism so we don't have to
> beat ourselves up for making a bad buy.
>

Yep. Except, for some guys, it becomes a job defense mechanism. That's
worse...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Mike,

> Yes, we are. We like gagets.
>

Now THAT makes total sense ;-)

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Dude,

> As many as possible
>

You're right. The point I was trying to make is that the pressure to
convert an existing 430 installation to WAAS in most cases won't be
real urgent yet. But it will no doubt become more and more useful to
have.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Dude,
>
>> As many as possible
>>
>
> You're right. The point I was trying to make is that the pressure to
> convert an existing 430 installation to WAAS in most cases won't be
> real urgent yet. But it will no doubt become more and more useful to
> have.
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
>

Gotta agree with that. I am putting off my purchase until something happens,
which I suspect it will at OSH. I am going to be doing more mountain flying
though, and would want the terrain feature. However, if you pay to upgrade
now for terrain, you are just going to be back in the shop for WAAS later.

I can wait for OSH since I only have an old mono GPS in my stack as it is.

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Dude,
>
>> I think it is a self defense mechanism so we don't have to
>> beat ourselves up for making a bad buy.
>>
>
> Yep. Except, for some guys, it becomes a job defense mechanism. That's
> worse...
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

I have seen it get worse for those in the industry, but you can usually get
a decent sales guy to give you a reasonably straight answer. Management,
Marketing, and Principals are the worst. The sales guy wants to sell you
again when he moves to the next company, the others play the numbers more.