Garmin 396 -- Maybe I spoke too soon...

[Jay Honeck]

So I spent three hours playing with a friend's new Garmin 396 last night,
sitting in a lawn chair whilst supping a couple of cold ones, and watching
as Hutchison, Kansas got the crap beat out of it with thunderstorms and
tornados. *Live*, on the unit.

At Oshkosh, my playing time was extremely limited, due to the feeding-frenzy
of pilots who wanted to see the unit. I watched for 20 minutes as others
manipulated the controls, and barely got to touch the thing before Mary's
patience ran out, and we had to move on.

Last night, however, my friend had to run some errands that took a couple of
hours, which allowed me to explore EVERYTHING the unit can do, and I've come
away with a whole new appreciation for the XM features.

Weather:
At OSH, the weather always appeared very pixilated and boxy. With hours to
mess around with it, it soon became obvious that the boxy look was due to
the fact that the demonstrators had the unit zoomed in to the 0.3 nm
range -- or even smaller. Zoomed out to a more normal 10 or 20 nm range,
the weather looks GREAT, and appears to be updating far more rapidly than
advertised. Most of the time the weather I was seeing was only 1 to 4
minutes old, which is incredible.

Within lines of thunderstorms, it shows individual severe weather cells as
"clickable" boxes. Run the cursor over it, and you'll see the cloud tops,
the direction it's moving, whether there is hail present, and the speed it's
going. Lightning is clearly depicted, and the various intensities of rain
can be easily discerned at a glance.

Better yet, when you're looking at an area of light rain, you can click on
the airport beneath the rain, and view the latest METAR. This lets you
truly "see" what the weather is doing, and gets around the problem of NEXRAD
radar being so hyper-sensitive that it depicts even light virga.

MOAs/TFRs:
Another thing I never got to see at OSH was the way the 396 depicts MOAs and
TFRs. Because of the active XM radio upload capability, the 396 doesn't
just depict MOAs -- it shows whether they are "hot" or not! That is an
amazingly useful feature that I had not heard anything about -- and the
active display of "pop-up" TFRs around sporting events could really be a
life-saver.

To say that this thing would have made our many cross-country flights this
past summer safer would be an understatement. We spent a couple of
unplanned nights in out-of-the-way cities, due to widespread storms. The
396 would make picking your way through that kind of stuff -- or, at the
opposite end of the spectrum, it would make the decision to land and sit it
out -- much easier and safer to do.

If you have limited yoke/panel space the 396 would be absolutely perfect.
Sadly, the screen is (IMHO) ridiculously undersized for what it's trying to
depict, and the processor is just too slow (refresh rates when moving the
cursor around are barely adequate) -- so I'm still going to wait for the
next generation of larger/higher resolution screens -- but my initial
dismissal of the 396 was premature. It is a marvelous concept that works
well, and will only improve with time.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Maule Driver]

I'm drooling. Today, my new toy is in the UPS truck circling the block.....

Jay Honeck wrote:
> -- but my initial
> dismissal of the 396 was premature. It is a marvelous concept that works
> well, and will only improve with time.

[Dan Luke]

"Jay Honeck" wrote:

> To say that this thing would have made our many cross-country flights this
> past summer safer would be an understatement. -- so I'm still going to
> wait for the next generation of larger/higher resolution screens

??

How long before Garmin comes out with a bigger-screen model, or someone else
makes a unit that will do what the 396 does? How many trips will you make
without this amazing tool while you're waiting? You can always trade up
later. It's easy to predict that there will be strong demand for used 396's.

Thanks for the pirep. I didn't know about the SUA status feature.

My 396 should arrive today, which will completely blow the afternoon as far
as any productivity goes.

--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

[Marco Leon]

Thanks for the feedback Jay. As a "lite" IFR flyer, I couldn't really
justify the cost of a stormscope in my Warrior. I'm still trying to justify
an autopilot. However, the Garmin 396 simply changes the product landscape
much like the GNS430 did when it first came out. To get the same capability
in such a neat package would cost you thousands more. (Sorry, IMO the PDA is
just not cockpit friendly)

I need to save my pennies (with the young family and all) but the decision
to get it for even light IFR is simply a no-brainer. Really tempted to use
the ole credit card but I'm resisting.

Marco Leon

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:3dlPe.277985$x96.231394@attbi_s72...
> So I spent three hours playing with a friend's new Garmin 396 last night,
> sitting in a lawn chair whilst supping a couple of cold ones, and watching
> as Hutchison, Kansas got the crap beat out of it with thunderstorms and
> tornados. *Live*, on the unit.
>
[snip]

[Maule Driver]

Dan Luke wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" wrote:
>>To say that this thing would have made our many cross-country
flights this
>>past summer safer would be an understatement. -- so I'm still going to
>>wait for the next generation of larger/higher resolution screens
> ??
> How long before Garmin comes out with a bigger-screen model, or someone else
> makes a unit that will do what the 396 does? How many trips will you make
> without this amazing tool while you're waiting? You can always trade up
> later. It's easy to predict that there will be strong demand for used 396's.
Good points. Jay, I'd suggest perhaps taking the next step and go
flying with one on a storm day. The value of acting without waiting may
tip the cost/benefit ratio for you.
YMMV of course.
>
> My 396 should arrive today, which will completely blow the afternoon as far
> as any productivity goes.
You and me both :-)

[Victor J. Osborne, Jr.]

The go/no go decision is MUCH easier w/ weather. XM sucks big rocks for
customer support but the product is awesome.

On a flight from Fl to TN, 2 weeks ago, we went around a line of cells
rather than wait on the ground or risk running between them (doable w/ XM).
For grins, later than day, I got the AOPA weather site to loop and it showed
that we would have waited for at least 2 hours on the ground. Instead, we
made a slight deviation using eyeball and screen for 15 min. added flying
time. Best thing since GPS.

Thx, {|;-)

Victor J. (Jim) Osborne, Jr.

"Maule Driver" > wrote in message
om...
> Dan Luke wrote:

> Good points. Jay, I'd suggest perhaps taking the next step and go flying
> with one on a storm day. The value of acting without waiting may tip the
> cost/benefit ratio for you.
> YMMV of course.

[Jay Honeck]

> Thanks for the feedback Jay. As a "lite" IFR flyer, I couldn't really
> justify the cost of a stormscope in my Warrior. I'm still trying to
> justify
> an autopilot. However, the Garmin 396 simply changes the product landscape
> much like the GNS430 did when it first came out. To get the same
> capability
> in such a neat package would cost you thousands more.

Since playing with the 396, I have spoken with a friend who has a friend
inside Garmin, and another friend who flies the "Big Iron", and they told me
that:

- Sales of the 396 have virtually shut down Garmin's sales of 430s and 530s.
It is simply superior to their in-panel stuff, and far less expensive. (And
Garmin actually expected this to happen.)

- The 396 has virtually stopped sales of other aviation GPS makes. (I'm not
sure I buy that, as I think the Lowrance 2000c and the AvMap were both
selling gangbusters at OSH, but perhaps all the pro-396 buzz since OSH has
killed them?)

- The 396's weather depiction and ease of use far exceed anything currently
available in corporate or airline service -- and costs tens of thousands
less -- so those guys are lining up to buy them, too.

Garmin truly has a winner here, but it's not quite a grand slam. It will be
when they (a) set up the unit in "portrait" mode (which is far more useful
than a "landscape" view for aviation), and (b) when they enlarge that stupid
dinky screen!

XM weather will soon spread to other makes and models, and the price will
drop. I can't wait!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Doug]

The 430, 530 and 480 will continue to sell. You can't legally do an IFR
approach with a handheld. The 480 has WASS and does the glideslope
thing on GPS approaches. Glad to hear the 396 is winner. GPS is
spreading to cars. You can real time TRAFFIC data piped to your car GPS
now. Cool. Tons of uses for GPS. Garmin has one for everything, Marine,
hiking, hunting, golf, etc. Package tracking is coming. They are on
trucks, railroad cars. The whole world is going GPS.

[Morgans]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote

> - The 396's weather depiction and ease of use far exceed anything
currently
> available in corporate or airline service -- and costs tens of thousands
> less -- so those guys are lining up to buy them, too.

So I wonder where someone flying a Falcon put their GPS/XM antenna? :-)
--
Jim in NC

[Doug Vetter]

Maule Driver wrote:
> I'm drooling. Today, my new toy is in the UPS truck circling the
> block.....

Same with mine.

Should be here tomorrow morning, just in time for a long weekend of
flying jumpers. The only downside I imagine is that the jumpers will be
so fixated on the 396 that they won't want to jump, OR I'll be so
fixated with the unit that I'll never give the call to open the jump
door...I don't know precisely which. :-)

-Doug

--
--------------------
Doug Vetter, CFIMEIA

http://www.dvcfi.com
--------------------

[Aluckyguess]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:hfrPe.281538$_o.240082@attbi_s71...
>> Thanks for the feedback Jay. As a "lite" IFR flyer, I couldn't really
>> justify the cost of a stormscope in my Warrior. I'm still trying to
>> justify
>> an autopilot. However, the Garmin 396 simply changes the product
>> landscape
>> much like the GNS430 did when it first came out. To get the same
>> capability
>> in such a neat package would cost you thousands more.
>
> Since playing with the 396, I have spoken with a friend who has a friend
> inside Garmin, and another friend who flies the "Big Iron", and they told
> me that:
>
> - Sales of the 396 have virtually shut down Garmin's sales of 430s and
> 530s. It is simply superior to their in-panel stuff, and far less
> expensive. (And Garmin actually expected this to happen.)
>
> - The 396 has virtually stopped sales of other aviation GPS makes. (I'm
> not sure I buy that, as I think the Lowrance 2000c and the AvMap were both
> selling gangbusters at OSH, but perhaps all the pro-396 buzz since OSH has
> killed them?)
>
> - The 396's weather depiction and ease of use far exceed anything
> currently available in corporate or airline service -- and costs tens of
> thousands less -- so those guys are lining up to buy them, too.
>
> Garmin truly has a winner here, but it's not quite a grand slam. It will
> be when they (a) set up the unit in "portrait" mode (which is far more
> useful than a "landscape" view for aviation), and (b) when they enlarge
> that stupid dinky screen!
>
I think the screen size is fine. I have it mounted on the yoke and if it was
bigger I think it would get in the way.
> XM weather will soon spread to other makes and models, and the price will
> drop. I can't wait!
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Ron Lee]

>- Sales of the 396 have virtually shut down Garmin's sales of 430s and 530s.
>It is simply superior to their in-panel stuff, and far less expensive. (And
>Garmin actually expected this to happen.)

This does not compute. The 396 is not capable of doing IFR
approaches. Seems to me that the two are aimed at entirely different
markets.

>- The 396 has virtually stopped sales of other aviation GPS makes. (I'm not
>sure I buy that, as I think the Lowrance 2000c and the AvMap were both
>selling gangbusters at OSH, but perhaps all the pro-396 buzz since OSH has
>killed them?)

May or may not be valid.

Ron Lee

[Jay Honeck]

> >- Sales of the 396 have virtually shut down Garmin's sales of 430s and
> >530s.
>>It is simply superior to their in-panel stuff, and far less expensive.
>>(And
>>Garmin actually expected this to happen.)
>
> This does not compute. The 396 is not capable of doing IFR
> approaches. Seems to me that the two are aimed at entirely different
> markets.

What percentage of 430s/530s are installed in aircraft owned by guys who
actually use them in hard IFR conditions? I'd be willing to bet it's a
pretty small percentage.

On my airport, they have been installed almost exclusively in the "rich
guys" planes -- NONE of whom (to my knowledge) fly hard IFR. (In fact, off
the top of my head I can only name one guy on our airport who flies hard IFR
with his personal aircraft.)

The other reasons I can think of are:

- The 396 does weather better than the 430/530.
- If you're buying a $3000 hand-held, you're probably not buying a $5000
panel-mount at the same time
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Maule Driver]

Despite the myopia concerning 'rich guys', I think you are pretty much
spot on here.

However, I think the price comparison is closer to $2500 handheld and
say $12,000 panel mount.

If your not flying IFR like rich guy Jay, which would you pick? :-)

Jay Honeck wrote:
> What percentage of 430s/530s are installed in aircraft owned by guys who
> actually use them in hard IFR conditions? I'd be willing to bet it's a
> pretty small percentage.
>
> On my airport, they have been installed almost exclusively in the "rich
> guys" planes -- NONE of whom (to my knowledge) fly hard IFR. (In fact, off
> the top of my head I can only name one guy on our airport who flies hard IFR
> with his personal aircraft.)
>
> The other reasons I can think of are:
>
> - The 396 does weather better than the 430/530.
> - If you're buying a $3000 hand-held, you're probably not buying a $5000
> panel-mount at the same time

[Thomas Borchert]

Jay,

Sorry, I don't buy any of that.

> - Sales of the 396 have virtually shut down Garmin's sales of 430s and 530s.
> It is simply superior to their in-panel stuff, and far less expensive.

It's not certified, period. And that's a big deal!


> - The 396 has virtually stopped sales of other aviation GPS makes.

In their dreams! Why would it? It is more capable than the others, but also WAY
more expensive.

> - The 396's weather depiction and ease of use far exceed anything currently
> available in corporate or airline service -- and costs tens of thousands
> less -- so those guys are lining up to buy them, too.

See point one. I don't buy it.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Doug Vetter]

Maule Driver wrote:
> Despite the myopia concerning 'rich guys', I think you are pretty much
> spot on here.
>
> However, I think the price comparison is closer to $2500 handheld and
> say $12,000 panel mount.

Since the XM weather integration on the 430/530 leaves a bit to be
desired, a more appropriate comparison would, I believe, be a panel
mount figure of around $22K:

430 w/CDI: $10K
EX500: $8K
XM RX: $5K

What I *really* wish Garmin would do is make that $1500 (soon to be
$2000 or more, I'm sure) WAAS upgrade for the 430/530 include a screen
and software upgrade so they could translate this "G1000" style software
presentation and weather / terrain depiction to those units so I
wouldn't have to buy an EX500 or MX20. Now *that* would be worth the
upgrade. Heck, even if they only offered it as a new unit (say the
"Garmin 440/540"), I'd pick one up and relegate the 430 to traffic /
lightning display / 2nd comm duty.

-Doug

--
--------------------
Doug Vetter, CFIMEIA

http://www.dvcfi.com
--------------------

[JB]

I was one of the lucky ones who arranged for a friend to buy the 396 at
OSH in late July. I wanted it BEFORE heading out in early Aug on my
family summer vacation flying up and down the East Coast during summer
T-storm season.

The peace of mind and safety margin went up about 100-fold now that I
have this system!! Like some others here, I spent 1 or 2 nites in
unplanned hotel stays in previous years because T storms were popping
up in the vicinity of my route. Ths time I was able to really see what
was in front of me. I had all the info I needed to plow ahead, ask for
a 10 degree change in course to avoid a buildup, or do something more
drastic (like do a 180 or land).

My thumb gets tired from all of the button pushing but that's to be
expected with a Garmin. The XM Wx is great, the display is fine, and
the interface is familiar. Of course there is a danger of getting over
confident and using the system to thread your way between 2 monster
cells. But as long as you keep your head screwed on straight, I think
the system is great. I'll never fly without it again!

--JB

[Mark T. Dame]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> Garmin truly has a winner here, but it's not quite a grand slam. It will be
> when they (a) set up the unit in "portrait" mode (which is far more useful
> than a "landscape" view for aviation), and (b) when they enlarge that stupid
> dinky screen!

I have a 295 which has a slightly smaller screen with the same landscape
orientation. Before that I had a 195, which is portrait. When I first
got the 295, the landscape mode really bugged me. But after I got the
map screen set up the way I wanted, my map was square, so it didn't
matter. The same was true on my 195. Once you add the fields for
waypoint distance/eta, altitude, airspeed, course and track, both
orientations ended up with a square map. Given that, I find the
landscape mode easier to use; i.e. it's easier to look from the map to
the right than it is to look from the map to the top or bottom of the
screen. At least it is for me.

As for the screen size, I don't think I'll be truly happy until I get
get a 15" MFD on my panel, so while I won't argue with you that the
screen size needs to be bigger, I also realize that no handheld will be
big enough for my desire. In spite of that, my 295 screen (1.8 x 3.3
(compared to 2.1 x 3.2 on the 396)) is easy to read and I don't have any
trouble using it even in hardball IFR.


-m
--
## Mark T. Dame >
## VP, Product Development
## MFM Software, Inc. (http://www.mfm.com/)
"For crying out loud, Patrick -- sit down... And enough with the
`give me the potatoes or give me death' nonsense."
-- The Far Side, Gary Larson

[Peter Duniho]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
>> - The 396 has virtually stopped sales of other aviation GPS makes.
>
> In their dreams! Why would it? It is more capable than the others, but
> also WAY > more expensive.

LOL!

In one post, you argue for buying ANR, because to do otherwise is "going
back to the stone age". But in this thread, you argue that not everyone
needs to spend more money just to get the latest and most capable
technology.

Well, at least ONE of your personalities seems to have a clue. That's a
start...

[Montblack]

("Peter Duniho" wrote)
[snip]
> Well, at least ONE of your personalities seems to have a clue. That's a
> start...


<heheheh>


Montblack

[Thomas Borchert]

Peter,

> In one post, you argue for buying ANR, because to do otherwise is "going
> back to the stone age". But in this thread, you argue that not everyone
> needs to spend more money just to get the latest and most capable
> technology.
>

I fail to see your point, should you have tried making one.

And I fail to see the reason to get nasty at me. But if it helps your
personality...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Peter R.]

Maule Driver > wrote:

> However, I think the price comparison is closer to $2500 handheld and
> say $12,000 panel mount.

You need to add an extra US$5,000 plus installation in your panel mount
cost for a certified WSI or XM satellite weather downlink receiver. :)

--
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 =----

[Peter R.]

Jay Honeck > wrote:

> - The 396 does weather better than the 430/530.

The 430/530 does *not* do weather at all without an additional $5,000
receiver.

That fact pointed out, I agree with Tom that the 430/530 are certified for
IFR flight. To counter your points about the number of pilots who fly
hard IFR with a 430/530 or a B/K certified GPS, I could name about
twenty-five including myself who do so at my home airport.

You are probably going to need a bigger sample size before I could accept
your low percentage figures. :)

--
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 =----

[Peter Duniho]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> I fail to see your point, should you have tried making one.

No surprise there.

> And I fail to see the reason to get nasty at me.

"Nasty"? You need to get out more.

[Maule Driver]

It was so uncalled for nasty that I almost got whiplash. At least one
of these personalities needs a clue.

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I fail to see your point, should you have tried making one.
>
>
> No surprise there.
>
>
>>And I fail to see the reason to get nasty at me.
>
>
> "Nasty"? You need to get out more.
>
>

[Doug Vetter]

JB wrote:
<snip>
> The peace of mind and safety margin went up about 100-fold now that I
> have this system!! Like some others here, I spent 1 or 2 nites in
> unplanned hotel stays in previous years because T storms were popping
> up in the vicinity of my route. Ths time I was able to really see
> what was in front of me. I had all the info I needed to plow ahead,
> ask for a 10 degree change in course to avoid a buildup, or do
> something more drastic (like do a 180 or land).
<snip>

I just finished my first weekend of flying and weather analysis with the
396 and I echo your sentiments. The 396's weather delivery and
integration is probably the biggest advance to the art of flying since
GPS itself.

I even love the automotive mode and XM radio -- my friend let me borrow
one of those small FM transmitters and I enjoyed full verbal route
guidance on my way home as well as reasonably clear XM radio. And I say
"reasonably clear" because the cheapo FM transmitter is really the
limiting factor in sound quality -- when the 396 is hooked directly to a
traditional receiver or a set of headphones (say the Bose Quiet Comfort
series) the quality is far superior.

I'm planning on writing a review on my site as soon as I can get some
other articles done, but I can assure everyone wondering that both the
396 AND the XM weather/audio services are worth the coin. This is going
to be a blockbuster.

I do wonder, however, whether this new capability will eventually lead
to an increase in unfortunate results with regard to pilots flying in
weather beyond their capabilities. Call it the "Cirrus effect"...

-Doug

--
--------------------
Doug Vetter, CFIMEIA

http://www.dvcfi.com
--------------------

[Dan Luke]

"Doug Vetter" wrote:

> I do wonder, however, whether this new capability will eventually lead
> to an increase in unfortunate results with regard to pilots flying in
> weather beyond their capabilities. Call it the "Cirrus effect"...

I'm wondering the same thing myself. Ever since I've had XM
weather--about two years--I've been pushing the weather harder. What's
the point of having it if you can't do that?

The problem is that it will make people overconfident; perhaps it's done
that to me already. "Cirrus effect" sounds like a good name for it.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[john smith]

Dan & Doug
Which XM Weather package are you subscribing to?

Does the subscription include the audio offerings, or is that
additional? How much?

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

john smith wrote:
> Dan & Doug
> Which XM Weather package are you subscribing to?
>
> Does the subscription include the audio offerings, or is that
> additional? How much?

Yeah, I want to know too. I'm drooling over this thing but I'm trying to get a
grip on the total cost. I'm also wondering if many rental aircraft will have a
place to tap in for power? Since I'm not a smoker, I've never paid attention to
the presence or absence of cigarette lighters in aircraft.

Final question: if they do have outlets, what voltage? The Garmin is 12V but I
think most GA aircraft are 28V.

It's a lot of money at stake. I don't want to bite the bullet and then find out
it's not really that great because you can't effectively power the thing in a
rental C-172 or Cherokee.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[Dan Luke]

>> Which XM Weather package are you subscribing to?
>>
>> Does the subscription include the audio offerings, or is that
>> additional? How much?

I've got the Aviator package; it's $50/mo. Aviator Lite is $30/mo.
Music is
extra.

http://www.wxworx.com/aviation/service_pricing.php

> Yeah, I want to know too. I'm drooling over this thing but I'm trying
> to get a grip on the total cost. I'm also wondering if many rental
> aircraft will have a place to tap in for power? Since I'm not a
> smoker, I've never paid attention to the presence or absence of
> cigarette lighters in aircraft.
>
> Final question: if they do have outlets, what voltage? The Garmin is
> 12V but I think most GA aircraft are 28V.

The adaptor works on either one.

> It's a lot of money at stake. I don't want to bite the bullet and
> then find out it's not really that great because you can't effectively
> power the thing in a rental C-172 or Cherokee.

Not a problem.

[Victor J. Osborne, Jr.]

I too have the Aviator. Aviation Consumer had good article last month on
the differences. I like the winds & TAF's in the air. I can see the
changes even as the rain/snow moves. TAF's & current conditions are better
than the clouds & rain. It helps knowing what the conditions are doing
along the route long before I can get the AWOS.

The cig. lighters w/ work to power the unit 24v or 12v for Wx I don't know
about the Garmin. I use an EFB (NavAero) also 12v or 24v.

--

Thx, {|;-)

Victor J. (Jim) Osborne, Jr.
"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
>>> Which XM Weather package are you subscribing to?
>>>
>>> Does the subscription include the audio offerings, or is that
>>> additional? How much?
>
> I've got the Aviator package; it's $50/mo. Aviator Lite is $30/mo. Music
> is
> extra.
>
> http://www.wxworx.com/aviation/service_pricing.php
>
>> Yeah, I want to know too. I'm drooling over this thing but I'm trying to
>> get a grip on the total cost. I'm also wondering if many rental aircraft
>> will have a place to tap in for power? Since I'm not a smoker, I've
>> never paid attention to the presence or absence of cigarette lighters in
>> aircraft.
>>
>> Final question: if they do have outlets, what voltage? The Garmin is
>> 12V but I think most GA aircraft are 28V.
>
> The adaptor works on either one.
>
>> It's a lot of money at stake. I don't want to bite the bullet and then
>> find out it's not really that great because you can't effectively power
>> the thing in a rental C-172 or Cherokee.
>
> Not a problem.
>
>

[Morgans]

"Doug Vetter" > wrote

> And I say
> "reasonably clear" because the cheapo FM transmitter is really the
> limiting factor in sound quality -- when the 396 is hooked directly to a
> traditional receiver or a set of headphones (say the Bose Quiet Comfort
> series) the quality is far superior.
>
Try using one of those tape adapters, hooked into the output. I find they
are much "higher Fi" than the radio transmitters.
--
Jim in NC

[Doug Vetter]

john smith wrote:
> Dan & Doug
> Which XM Weather package are you subscribing to?
>
> Does the subscription include the audio offerings, or is that
> additional? How much?

John,

I'm subscribing to the top-end Aviator package (for now, anyway).

The aviation weather package does not include audio, but it's only $7/mo
additional -- a wash for me considering I was subscribing to the online
service for $8/month waiting to figure out what hardware to buy to
receive programming via satellite.

I probably couldn't justify the service costs if the equipment were
installed in my airplane (and thus restricted to use while flying), but
the fact that I can take this box anywhere and have access to weather
and audio makes it a bit easier to write the check every month.

For more info on the weather packages, check out:

http://www.xmwxweather.com/

-Doug

--
--------------------
Doug Vetter, CFIMEIA

http://www.dvcfi.com
--------------------