Install a Garmin GNS430 or an "Apollo" GNS480 ?

[Roy Page]

I was all ready to install a GNS 430 but now feeling that a GNS 480 may be a
better option.
Although more expensive, I am getting the impression that the GNS 480 has
significant advantages.
It seems that UPS stole a lead on Garmin with their WAAS approved unit.
Now with Garmin owning the brand and the UPS unit being budged as the Garmin
AT GNS 480 I am not sure which unit to install.
Will Garmin upgrade the 430's display and software to give it WAAS
capability or will they just upgrade the GNS 530 and leave the 430 a poor
relation ??
Over to the group to help me decide - Install a 430 or 480 ?

Roy Page [N5804F Archer II]
Beloit Ohio 44609

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:58:35 GMT, "Roy Page" > wrote:

>I was all ready to install a GNS 430 but now feeling that a GNS 480 may be a
>better option.
>Although more expensive, I am getting the impression that the GNS 480 has
>significant advantages.
>It seems that UPS stole a lead on Garmin with their WAAS approved unit.
>Now with Garmin owning the brand and the UPS unit being budged as the Garmin
>AT GNS 480 I am not sure which unit to install.
>Will Garmin upgrade the 430's display and software to give it WAAS
>capability or will they just upgrade the GNS 530 and leave the 430 a poor
>relation ??
>Over to the group to help me decide - Install a 430 or 480 ?
>
>Roy Page [N5804F Archer II]
>Beloit Ohio 44609
>
>

I made the choice last year to install (what is now) the 480.

It is WAAS enabled NOW. Version 2.0 of the software was just released which
gives it vertical guidance. And it has airways in the data base which can
be entered into the flight plan.

The price difference was not a factor for me, though.


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

[Roy Page]

Thanks Ron, I appreciate your input, did not know about the database having
Victor airways, that is very useful when ATC change your clearance.
Roy

"Ron Rosenfeld" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:58:35 GMT, "Roy Page" > wrote:
>
>>I was all ready to install a GNS 430 but now feeling that a GNS 480 may be
>>a
>>better option.
>>Although more expensive, I am getting the impression that the GNS 480 has
>>significant advantages.
>>It seems that UPS stole a lead on Garmin with their WAAS approved unit.
>>Now with Garmin owning the brand and the UPS unit being budged as the
>>Garmin
>>AT GNS 480 I am not sure which unit to install.
>>Will Garmin upgrade the 430's display and software to give it WAAS
>>capability or will they just upgrade the GNS 530 and leave the 430 a poor
>>relation ??
>>Over to the group to help me decide - Install a 430 or 480 ?
>>
>>Roy Page [N5804F Archer II]
>>Beloit Ohio 44609
>>
>>
>
> I made the choice last year to install (what is now) the 480.
>
> It is WAAS enabled NOW. Version 2.0 of the software was just released
> which
> gives it vertical guidance. And it has airways in the data base which can
> be entered into the flight plan.
>
> The price difference was not a factor for me, though.
>
>
> Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Javier Henderson]

Did they add terrain boundaries to the GNS480/CNX80 yet?

Can the GNS480/CNX80 display mode S traffic?

Can the GNS480/CNX80 display Ryan/TCAD traffic?

As for the victor airways, it's in the "nice to have" category, but
not much of a deciding factor for me. I've had a GNS430 for four
years, and got used to entering some defining waypoint for the airway
that ATC wants me on.

To each his own, of course, it's good to have choices. I just thought
I'd add a few questions.

-jav

"Roy Page" > writes:

> Thanks Ron, I appreciate your input, did not know about the database having
> Victor airways, that is very useful when ATC change your clearance.
> Roy
>
> "Ron Rosenfeld" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:58:35 GMT, "Roy Page" > wrote:
> >
> >>I was all ready to install a GNS 430 but now feeling that a GNS 480 may be
> >>a
> >>better option.
> >>Although more expensive, I am getting the impression that the GNS 480 has
> >>significant advantages.
> >>It seems that UPS stole a lead on Garmin with their WAAS approved unit.
> >>Now with Garmin owning the brand and the UPS unit being budged as the
> >>Garmin
> >>AT GNS 480 I am not sure which unit to install.
> >>Will Garmin upgrade the 430's display and software to give it WAAS
> >>capability or will they just upgrade the GNS 530 and leave the 430 a poor
> >>relation ??
> >>Over to the group to help me decide - Install a 430 or 480 ?
> >>
> >>Roy Page [N5804F Archer II]
> >>Beloit Ohio 44609
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I made the choice last year to install (what is now) the 480.
> >
> > It is WAAS enabled NOW. Version 2.0 of the software was just released
> > which
> > gives it vertical guidance. And it has airways in the data base which can
> > be entered into the flight plan.
> >
> > The price difference was not a factor for me, though.
> >
> >
> > Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On 19 Oct 2004 19:20:15 -0700, Javier Henderson > wrote:

>Did they add terrain boundaries to the GNS480/CNX80 yet?

Not to my knowledge. Nor am I aware of any plans to do so. But you can
read altitude -- either GPS or encoding altimeter derived -- along with the
MSA for your location.

>
>Can the GNS480/CNX80 display mode S traffic?

You can display traffic using either the TIS functionality or interface
with the 3COM Sky watch system.

>
>Can the GNS480/CNX80 display Ryan/TCAD traffic?

Don't know

>

>As for the victor airways, it's in the "nice to have" category, but
>not much of a deciding factor for me. I've had a GNS430 for four
>years, and got used to entering some defining waypoint for the airway
>that ATC wants me on.

Here in the NE, with frequent and complicated routing changes, it becomes
"very" nice to have.

>
>To each his own, of course, it's good to have choices. I just thought
>I'd add a few questions.


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

[Mike Adams]

"Roy Page" > wrote:

> Over to the group to help me decide - Install a 430 or 480 ?

There have been several discussions on this recently. Check Google. The bottom line as I recall, is that
the 480 is viewed as more advanced and better suited to serious IFR work. It's more like a big-iron FMS
in its user interface, and quite a different flight planning concept than the 430. It also has airways, WAAS,
and a bit larger display. The 430 on the other hand benefits from the large installed user base (Garmin
can't abandon it), and a somewhat easier to use interface, especially for casual (occasional IFR plus
VFR "airport finding") use. The 480 is also about $3K more expensive. I haven't kept up on all the traffic
and weather display options, but the 430 is fairly well understood in this area. The 480 may depend on
the MX-20 MFD for some of this.

Hope this helps.
Mike

[Al Marzo]

Roy;
Get the newest and best you can afford. Garmin has a long history of
abandoning its older line and I'll suspect that's what will happen to
the 430. First, they'll upgrade the unit for about as much money as
the 480, then they'll just stop doing it. Secondly, all the rich guys
;-) will be taking their 430's out for the 480's and ebay will be
flooded with them. Then JA Air will be offering "factory
reconditioned" 430's which are really old factory stock to move them
out.

As I've stated before, the worst thing that could have happened was
that Garmin would be allowed to buy their competition.

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:58:35 GMT, "Roy Page" >
wrote:

>I was all ready to install a GNS 430 but now feeling that a GNS 480 may be a
>better option.
>Although more expensive, I am getting the impression that the GNS 480 has
>significant advantages.
>It seems that UPS stole a lead on Garmin with their WAAS approved unit.
>Now with Garmin owning the brand and the UPS unit being budged as the Garmin
>AT GNS 480 I am not sure which unit to install.
>Will Garmin upgrade the 430's display and software to give it WAAS
>capability or will they just upgrade the GNS 530 and leave the 430 a poor
>relation ??
>Over to the group to help me decide - Install a 430 or 480 ?
>
>Roy Page [N5804F Archer II]
>Beloit Ohio 44609
>
>

[Roy Page]

Al,
I have to say I think you may be entirely correct.
For sure Garmin should not have been allowed to buy out their main
competitor.
And, I think the 480 interface is more in line with the regular 'IFR system'

The reason I asked for help in deciding was based on the cost issue.
If the 480 was a few percent higher in cost that the 430 I would have no
doubts.

However, another factor has emerged by the responses to this posting.
My Archer has the factory installed King stack, KMA20, KX170B, KX170B and
Transponder.
Like many before me I am intending to take out the #1 KX170B and KI214 and
move them down to the #2 position.
A 430 sits nicely in the hole left in the #1 position, but the 480 is deeper
and will need the transponder moved.

Next year, if I am not bankrupt, I hope to fit a MX170B and a new audio
panel
My existing avionic stack looks dated, but all the stuff is in excellent
condition and is very well positioned.
I can't afford to upgrade all the gear in one go, but don't want to finish
up with an untidy and hard to work stack.

Roy


"Al Marzo" > wrote in message
...
> Roy;
> Get the newest and best you can afford. Garmin has a long history of
> abandoning its older line and I'll suspect that's what will happen to
> the 430. First, they'll upgrade the unit for about as much money as
> the 480, then they'll just stop doing it. Secondly, all the rich guys
> ;-) will be taking their 430's out for the 480's and ebay will be
> flooded with them. Then JA Air will be offering "factory
> reconditioned" 430's which are really old factory stock to move them
> out.
>
> As I've stated before, the worst thing that could have happened was
> that Garmin would be allowed to buy their competition.
>
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:58:35 GMT, "Roy Page" >
> wrote:
>
>>I was all ready to install a GNS 430 but now feeling that a GNS 480 may be
>>a
>>better option.
>>Although more expensive, I am getting the impression that the GNS 480 has
>>significant advantages.
>>It seems that UPS stole a lead on Garmin with their WAAS approved unit.
>>Now with Garmin owning the brand and the UPS unit being budged as the
>>Garmin
>>AT GNS 480 I am not sure which unit to install.
>>Will Garmin upgrade the 430's display and software to give it WAAS
>>capability or will they just upgrade the GNS 530 and leave the 430 a poor
>>relation ??
>>Over to the group to help me decide - Install a 430 or 480 ?
>>
>>Roy Page [N5804F Archer II]
>>Beloit Ohio 44609
>>
>>
>

[Mike Rapoport]

UPS was not Garmin's "main competitor". UPS had insignificant revenue,
didn't make money and really had to sell. Everybody complains about the
"loss of competition" but very few were buying UPS's products. The choice
was being aquired or disappearing.

Mike
MU-2

"Roy Page" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Al,
> I have to say I think you may be entirely correct.
> For sure Garmin should not have been allowed to buy out their main
> competitor.
> And, I think the 480 interface is more in line with the regular 'IFR
> system'
>
> The reason I asked for help in deciding was based on the cost issue.
> If the 480 was a few percent higher in cost that the 430 I would have no
> doubts.
>
> However, another factor has emerged by the responses to this posting.
> My Archer has the factory installed King stack, KMA20, KX170B, KX170B and
> Transponder.
> Like many before me I am intending to take out the #1 KX170B and KI214 and
> move them down to the #2 position.
> A 430 sits nicely in the hole left in the #1 position, but the 480 is
> deeper and will need the transponder moved.
>
> Next year, if I am not bankrupt, I hope to fit a MX170B and a new audio
> panel
> My existing avionic stack looks dated, but all the stuff is in excellent
> condition and is very well positioned.
> I can't afford to upgrade all the gear in one go, but don't want to finish
> up with an untidy and hard to work stack.
>
> Roy
>
>
> "Al Marzo" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Roy;
>> Get the newest and best you can afford. Garmin has a long history of
>> abandoning its older line and I'll suspect that's what will happen to
>> the 430. First, they'll upgrade the unit for about as much money as
>> the 480, then they'll just stop doing it. Secondly, all the rich guys
>> ;-) will be taking their 430's out for the 480's and ebay will be
>> flooded with them. Then JA Air will be offering "factory
>> reconditioned" 430's which are really old factory stock to move them
>> out.
>>
>> As I've stated before, the worst thing that could have happened was
>> that Garmin would be allowed to buy their competition.
>>
>> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:58:35 GMT, "Roy Page" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>I was all ready to install a GNS 430 but now feeling that a GNS 480 may
>>>be a
>>>better option.
>>>Although more expensive, I am getting the impression that the GNS 480 has
>>>significant advantages.
>>>It seems that UPS stole a lead on Garmin with their WAAS approved unit.
>>>Now with Garmin owning the brand and the UPS unit being budged as the
>>>Garmin
>>>AT GNS 480 I am not sure which unit to install.
>>>Will Garmin upgrade the 430's display and software to give it WAAS
>>>capability or will they just upgrade the GNS 530 and leave the 430 a poor
>>>relation ??
>>>Over to the group to help me decide - Install a 430 or 480 ?
>>>
>>>Roy Page [N5804F Archer II]
>>>Beloit Ohio 44609
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

[Marco Leon]

As a point of reference, I asked a Garmin rep yesterday as to their plans
for WAAS and terrain for the 430. They expect to offer the terrain
(non-TAWS) in about 8 weeks time at a price of $500. They need to make a
physical change to the unit (a new map board) and upgrade the software.
Garmin wants to first make sure they can deliver the TAWS upgrades to the
530 to meet compliance dates. As for WAAS, they are targeting 1st quarter of
next year at a price of $1,500. This will require a processor change and
software upgrade. I don't remember him mentioning any other hardware
changes.

So to get WAAS and terrain, the 430 becomes comparable to the 480 in price
($1,000 difference). What the 480 will lack in terrain and VFR mapping
features, it kinda makes up for in victor airways and a slightly larger
screen. My own opinion is that the user interface is not as intuitive as the
430 and it doesn't fit the user-friendly strategy that Garmin has
captialized on. I bet the engineers are working on an upgraded UI for the
430 and 530 that will include the handful of benefits the 480 offers. Think
about it, if the 430/530 had victor airways and once it's upgraded to WAAS,
what does the 480 have over the 430/530? IMHO, I think the 480 is more in
danger of being nixed than the 430.

Marco Leon
N36616




"Roy Page" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> I was all ready to install a GNS 430 but now feeling that a GNS 480 may be
a
> better option.
> Although more expensive, I am getting the impression that the GNS 480 has
> significant advantages.
> It seems that UPS stole a lead on Garmin with their WAAS approved unit.
> Now with Garmin owning the brand and the UPS unit being budged as the
Garmin
> AT GNS 480 I am not sure which unit to install.
> Will Garmin upgrade the 430's display and software to give it WAAS
> capability or will they just upgrade the GNS 530 and leave the 430 a poor
> relation ??
> Over to the group to help me decide - Install a 430 or 480 ?
>
> Roy Page [N5804F Archer II]
> Beloit Ohio 44609
>
>
>

[Roy Smith]

Mike Rapoport > wrote:
> UPS was not Garmin's "main competitor". UPS had insignificant revenue,
> didn't make money and really had to sell. Everybody complains about the
> "loss of competition" but very few were buying UPS's products. The choice
> was being aquired or disappearing.

The fact that UPS-AT was in bad shape (I don't know that they were,
but I'll take that as a given for the moment) doesn't take away from
the fact that they were Garmin's main competition.

Is there anybody else out there that was competing with Garmin for the
GA avionics market than UPS? Narco is dead. Northstar has pulled out
of aviation. King seems to have given up developing new products.
Collins is concentrating on the commercial market.

The sad fact is that the GA avionics market just isn't big enough to
support more than one major manufacturer, and Garmin seems to have
won.

[Marco Leon]

Unless anyone here is privy to the information discussed in Garmin's
boardroom, we'll never know for sure. I think it was just that the price was
right for a buy-out. UPS wanted out of that business for a while.
Eliminating competition was probably one of many factors that played into
that decision.

Marco Leon
N36616

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Rapoport > wrote:
> > UPS was not Garmin's "main competitor". UPS had insignificant revenue,
> > didn't make money and really had to sell. Everybody complains about the
> > "loss of competition" but very few were buying UPS's products. The
choice
> > was being aquired or disappearing.
>
> The fact that UPS-AT was in bad shape (I don't know that they were,
> but I'll take that as a given for the moment) doesn't take away from
> the fact that they were Garmin's main competition.
>
> Is there anybody else out there that was competing with Garmin for the
> GA avionics market than UPS? Narco is dead. Northstar has pulled out
> of aviation. King seems to have given up developing new products.
> Collins is concentrating on the commercial market.
>
> The sad fact is that the GA avionics market just isn't big enough to
> support more than one major manufacturer, and Garmin seems to have
> won.

[Dude]

I would say that the 430 will likely be replaced by a next generation box,
not the 480. Likely, they will try to abandon the 480 first. There will
likely only be one upgrade path in the generation after next. (or even next
generation).

The reason I think this is that the two units are part of seperate divisions
at Garmin and the 430 unit is at the HQ, but the other is not. Also, the
430 has a much larger install base. Decisions to abandon old gear make
sense when the install base gets tiny, or when you can no longer get parts.
All these new units are now using parts that will become expensive or
irreplacable when the rest of the electronics industry no longer uses them.
Eventually, the cost of perceived badwill from dropping the older units will
be less than the cost of continued support.

They could possibly change their business model to a lease/subscription
model like Microsoft did, but the market is not really ready for it yet.
Besides, people in aviation want something that is dependable, and if you
tell me it will be replaced in 3 years, I have to wonder how well you built
it.

Also, Garmin has other competitors, but not many are doing nearly as well in
the light airplane world. Avidyne is now their biggest competitor. King,
Honeywell, and Chelton are coming after them as well. The guys doing
software for PC and Palm platforms are a threat. Microsoft could enter the
fray, and so could a few Japanese companies which would likely happen if
Toyota or Honda started building planes. So anyone thinking the UPS
acquisition should have been stopped has weak case in my mind.



"Al Marzo" > wrote in message
...
> Roy;
> Get the newest and best you can afford. Garmin has a long history of
> abandoning its older line and I'll suspect that's what will happen to
> the 430. First, they'll upgrade the unit for about as much money as
> the 480, then they'll just stop doing it. Secondly, all the rich guys
> ;-) will be taking their 430's out for the 480's and ebay will be
> flooded with them. Then JA Air will be offering "factory
> reconditioned" 430's which are really old factory stock to move them
> out.
>
> As I've stated before, the worst thing that could have happened was
> that Garmin would be allowed to buy their competition.
>
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:58:35 GMT, "Roy Page" >
> wrote:
>
>>I was all ready to install a GNS 430 but now feeling that a GNS 480 may be
>>a
>>better option.
>>Although more expensive, I am getting the impression that the GNS 480 has
>>significant advantages.
>>It seems that UPS stole a lead on Garmin with their WAAS approved unit.
>>Now with Garmin owning the brand and the UPS unit being budged as the
>>Garmin
>>AT GNS 480 I am not sure which unit to install.
>>Will Garmin upgrade the 430's display and software to give it WAAS
>>capability or will they just upgrade the GNS 530 and leave the 430 a poor
>>relation ??
>>Over to the group to help me decide - Install a 430 or 480 ?
>>
>>Roy Page [N5804F Archer II]
>>Beloit Ohio 44609
>>
>>
>

[Mike Rapoport]

I don't think that an unprofitable holder of <10% of the market (guess) is
really a "major competitor" to the holder of 75% of the market. UPS AT was
attractive for a number of reasons including ADS-B which I believe will
become a big deal in the future. It also didn't make too much sense for a
package delivery company to be developing and manufacturing avionics.

The GNS 480 is a half step above the 430/530. It has WAAS and airways but
also has fairly obtuse operating logic. The 430/530 have an easy upgrade
path to the GNS 480 capibilities. I think that the next big retrofit
product is an integrated product (like G1000) that has an ethernet-like
serial interface.. Once you have the sensors and displays all talking to
each other, it will be cheap and easy to add features by adding another
sensor to the network along with a software change. The installed cost of
avionics will be much lower if there are only four wires to connect.

Mike
MU-2

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Rapoport > wrote:
>> UPS was not Garmin's "main competitor". UPS had insignificant revenue,
>> didn't make money and really had to sell. Everybody complains about the
>> "loss of competition" but very few were buying UPS's products. The
>> choice
>> was being aquired or disappearing.
>
> The fact that UPS-AT was in bad shape (I don't know that they were,
> but I'll take that as a given for the moment) doesn't take away from
> the fact that they were Garmin's main competition.
>
> Is there anybody else out there that was competing with Garmin for the
> GA avionics market than UPS? Narco is dead. Northstar has pulled out
> of aviation. King seems to have given up developing new products.
> Collins is concentrating on the commercial market.
>
> The sad fact is that the GA avionics market just isn't big enough to
> support more than one major manufacturer, and Garmin seems to have
> won.

[C Kingsbury]

"Dude" > wrote in message
...


> Also, Garmin has other competitors, but not many are doing nearly as well
in
> the light airplane world. Avidyne is now their biggest competitor.

Yeah, except that when you consider that every Cirrus/Lancair ships with at
least a pair of 430's, it's not much of a competitor. It's as if every Chevy
truck shipped with a Ford engine. The Avidyne Entegra system may be nice to
fly behind but it is at least a generation behind the G1000, and will likely
continue to fall further behind as time goes by. If Avidyne can't do
something new and interesting within 2 years they're finished.

> King,
> Honeywell, and Chelton are coming after them as well. The guys doing
> software for PC and Palm platforms are a threat. Microsoft could enter the
> fray, and so could a few Japanese companies which would likely happen if
> Toyota or Honda started building planes. So anyone thinking the UPS
> acquisition should have been stopped has weak case in my mind.

As someone else mentioned, the market is not necessarily big enough. The
real strength of the G1000 is that it can be put into nearly any plane up to
light bizjets and perhaps beyond. This provides a base to spread the
development costs across.

I would love to see Toyota or Honda building planes, but then I used to
believe in the Easter Bunny too. Dunno about Toyota but I wouldn't be
shocked if we saw Honda enter the LSA market, given their experience with
ATVs, PWCs, and motorcycles. In any case, odds are whatever they build will
be proprietary to their planes and so not do the rest of us any good- kind
of like the G1000.

Best,
-cwk.

[Dude]

> Yeah, except that when you consider that every Cirrus/Lancair ships with
> at
> least a pair of 430's, it's not much of a competitor. It's as if every
> Chevy
> truck shipped with a Ford engine. The Avidyne Entegra system may be nice
> to
> fly behind but it is at least a generation behind the G1000, and will
> likely
> continue to fall further behind as time goes by. If Avidyne can't do
> something new and interesting within 2 years they're finished.
>

A good point, and it will be interesting to watch. However, Avidyne makes a
lot more on each of those planes than Garmin does. Garmin may be like
Microsoft or IBM in some ways, but not quite. Jeppessen on the other hand IS
Microsoft like in their monopoly and the pricing reflects it.


>> King,
>> Honeywell, and Chelton are coming after them as well. The guys doing
>> software for PC and Palm platforms are a threat. Microsoft could enter
>> the
>> fray, and so could a few Japanese companies which would likely happen if
>> Toyota or Honda started building planes. So anyone thinking the UPS
>> acquisition should have been stopped has weak case in my mind.
>
> As someone else mentioned, the market is not necessarily big enough. The
> real strength of the G1000 is that it can be put into nearly any plane up
> to
> light bizjets and perhaps beyond. This provides a base to spread the
> development costs across.
>
> I would love to see Toyota or Honda building planes, but then I used to
> believe in the Easter Bunny too. Dunno about Toyota but I wouldn't be
> shocked if we saw Honda enter the LSA market, given their experience with
> ATVs, PWCs, and motorcycles. In any case, odds are whatever they build
> will
> be proprietary to their planes and so not do the rest of us any good- kind
> of like the G1000.
>
> Best,
> -cwk.
>

I think you should be a bit less cynical about the G1000. The fact that
they are only selling to OEMs is really understandable. Garmin or another
company will doubtlessly be in the market in the next few years with Glass
upgrades for older models. Glass was available for experimentals before the
G1000. The economics has to work though. As time goes on, the easier and
cheaper it will be to do this.

[Victor J. Osborne, Jr.]

Just keep in mind that they have been saying Terrain & WAAS for years. I'll
believe it when I see it.

Rant mode off, {|;-(

Victor J. (Jim) Osborne, Jr.


N326DK

[Mike Rapoport]

They have been showing both for quite a while, it is the FAA that is holding
things up.

Mike
MU-2

"Victor J. Osborne, Jr." > wrote in message
...
> Just keep in mind that they have been saying Terrain & WAAS for years.
> I'll believe it when I see it.
>
> Rant mode off, {|;-(
>
> Victor J. (Jim) Osborne, Jr.
>
>
> N326DK
>

[Marco Leon]

I understand Victor's apprehension but the fact is that Garmin is installing
TAWS on the 530's as we speak (or type). Anyone out there have it done? I
imagine most of the people laying out the dough for a TAWS upgrade are doing
it as a business necessity.

Marco

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
k.net...
> They have been showing both for quite a while, it is the FAA that is
holding
> things up.
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>
> "Victor J. Osborne, Jr." > wrote in message
> ...
> > Just keep in mind that they have been saying Terrain & WAAS for years.
> > I'll believe it when I see it.
> >
> > Rant mode off, {|;-(
> >
> > Victor J. (Jim) Osborne, Jr.
> >
> >
> > N326DK
> >
>
>

[Mike Rapoport]

I think that they start later this week. All turbine powered aircraft
certified with more than six passenger seats are required to have TAWS by
early 2005 (I forgot the exact date.) Mine is scheduled to go soon.

Mike
MU-2

"Marco Leon" <mmleon(at)yahoo.com> wrote in message
...
>I understand Victor's apprehension but the fact is that Garmin is
>installing
> TAWS on the 530's as we speak (or type). Anyone out there have it done? I
> imagine most of the people laying out the dough for a TAWS upgrade are
> doing
> it as a business necessity.
>
> Marco
>
> "Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
> k.net...
>> They have been showing both for quite a while, it is the FAA that is
> holding
>> things up.
>>
>> Mike
>> MU-2
>>
>> "Victor J. Osborne, Jr." > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Just keep in mind that they have been saying Terrain & WAAS for years.
>> > I'll believe it when I see it.
>> >
>> > Rant mode off, {|;-(
>> >
>> > Victor J. (Jim) Osborne, Jr.
>> >
>> >
>> > N326DK
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

[Scott Skylane]

Mike Rapoport wrote:

> I think that they start later this week. All turbine powered aircraft
> certified with more than six passenger seats are required to have TAWS by
> early 2005 (I forgot the exact date.) Mine is scheduled to go soon.
>
Mike,

Just curious, what's the installation going to cost?

As an interesting study in regulation logic, your airplane, and many
even smaller than it, are required to install terrain avoidance. The
100,000 lb. 4-engine, 250 kt monster I fly at work isn't. Doesn't have
turbines.

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane

[Victor J. Osborne, Jr.]

I'm not talking about the full TAWS required for turbine operators. I mean
the $500 right-side data card upgrade that's been promised for years. I
know the lawyers had to get over the issue of next of kin suing any time
someone did a CFIT. But come on; three years of "It'll be available next
quarter."

Victor J. (Jim) Osborne, Jr.


wishing he bought an Avidyne

[Mike Rapoport]

The issue is still getting the FAA to certify it. It will be out soon after
TAWS.

Mike
MU-2


"Victor J. Osborne, Jr." > wrote in message
...
> I'm not talking about the full TAWS required for turbine operators. I
> mean the $500 right-side data card upgrade that's been promised for years.
> I know the lawyers had to get over the issue of next of kin suing any time
> someone did a CFIT. But come on; three years of "It'll be available next
> quarter."
>
> Victor J. (Jim) Osborne, Jr.
>
>
> wishing he bought an Avidyne
>

[Mike Rapoport]

"Scott Skylane" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
>> I think that they start later this week. All turbine powered aircraft
>> certified with more than six passenger seats are required to have TAWS by
>> early 2005 (I forgot the exact date.) Mine is scheduled to go soon.
>>
> Mike,
>
> Just curious, what's the installation going to cost?

I forget but it by far the cheapest TAWS installation availible.

>
> As an interesting study in regulation logic, your airplane, and many even
> smaller than it, are required to install terrain avoidance. The 100,000
> lb. 4-engine, 250 kt monster I fly at work isn't. Doesn't have turbines.

OK, we give up. What is it? DC-6?

Mike
MU-2

>
> Happy Flying!
> Scott Skylane
>