396 plus COM or GNS x30???

[three-eight-hotel]

Hi all,

I was a lurker of these groups for some time, before asking my first
question not too long back on a COM issue I was/am having. Since then,
I have tried to stay active in keeping up on the posts and have tried
to add input, where I think I can add value, but I am well aware of how
subjective that is... ;-)

I am getting familiar with the regular posters and have found great
benefit in hearing some of the discussions on a lot of interesting
topics. The hot topic these days seems to be tne Garmin 396!

I have a very low-end IFR setup, and have only 1 COM, which currently
is giving me fits! Not having a back-up (other than the handheld) is
driving me crazy. I've been drooling over the GNS 430 for a couple of
years now, mostly because it would provide me with a secondary COM and
it would give me (in my understanding) legal IFR DME, which is another
valuable tool I'm lacking in my plane.

Like so many others, I don't have money to burn, so I spend more time
dreaming and planning, than I do actually making things happen, but I
would be more willing to find a way to make the money work, if I could
actually stabalize on "one" good plan in the first place!

So I started thinking.... (no wise cracks please) Portable handheld
with the many wis-bang features that it does have (downloadable Wx,
terrain display, etc.) and take the difference and put it towards 2nd
COM and possibly DME (for shooting those DME required approaches)
OR.... Panel mount with built in COM, legal DME and do Wx and terrain
planning the hard way???

Other benefits to the handheld are using it in the car, just watching
Wx at home (for fun), identifying the hot fishing spots on Eagle Lake
and being able to get back to them quickly... ;-)

I guess I'm asking the "what would you do?" question? How valuable is
a certified, panel mounted, IFR GPS, vs. the handheld with all of it's
really cool capabilities???

Keep in mind my parameters are: (current configuration)
1. Single COM (assume it's operable...;-)
2. No DME
3. Standard DG
4. Two VOR's (only one with glide-slope)
5. Other "basic" components, required for IFR flight

Thanks in advance for any input or discussion!

Best Regards,
Todd

[john smith]

Buy used equipment.
Panel mounted COM and GPS.
The handheld is for backup and providing information not required by the
regs.

[Maule Driver]

I have a 'low ball' setup in my Maule. A certified GNC300XL (kind of
second generation)with comm, one NavCom with slope, and that's it. The
300XL must go used for a song but the installation is the real cost.
Gives you DME and ADF equivalence and GPS approaches. I'm putting the
396 in for weather and GPS backup.

john smith wrote:
> Buy used equipment.
> Panel mounted COM and GPS.
> The handheld is for backup and providing information not required by the
> regs.

[three-eight-hotel]

Good suggestions!

Geez! I get serious tunnel-vision at times, especially when it's
related to a big purchases... For two years, I've been looking at the
GNS430, with its vivid colors, moving map, built in COM, and had my
mind directed towards that as the target! I briefly researched a few
of the lower end IFR certified GPS's, but to be honest, I don't know
that I was even aware of the built in COM factor outside of the GNS
family? For some reason, I had it in my mind that I had to go with a
$7k GPS to get that capability.

I just did a quick search and found an overhauled GNC300XL for about
$2600 (and saw another for around $2300), which like you said, gives me
COM, DME and GPS approaches! I'm assuming that would come with the G/S
indicator, but I'm not sure??? Just buying a second COM and DME would
put me above that cost! Then, picking up a 396 for weather, TFR's,
etc. for another $2500... All that and still $2k under the GNS430!

Obviously this opens up many possibilities and much more research is
required, but at least it gets my head out of the tunnel. Thanks!

If others have had similar experiences as far as minimal original IFR
configuration and gone the same route as discussed here, I would be
very interested in hearing what equipment you went with and what your
experience and satisfaction has been. There are so many choices! I'd
like to give myself at least 2 or 3 options and then get a nice list of
pro's and con's going before I start figuring out how I'm going to pay
for all of this! ;-)

Best Regards,
Todd

[Dan Luke]

"three-eight-hotel" wrote:

> I just did a quick search and found an overhauled GNC300XL for about
> $2600 (and saw another for around $2300), which like you said, gives
> me
> COM, DME and GPS approaches!

Beware: the GNC300 will require the installation of external
annunciation, etc. which will add considerably to the cost. The 430
does not require this. Make sure you get estimates from your avionics
shop for various installations before you commit to anything.

> I'm assuming that would come with the G/S
> indicator, but I'm not sure???

No. That will add more cost if your current indicator cannot be
used--it would add more cost with the 430, too..

> Just buying a second COM and DME would
> put me above that cost! Then, picking up a 396 for weather, TFR's,
> etc. for another $2500... All that and still $2k under the GNS430!

> If others have had similar experiences as far as minimal original IFR
> configuration and gone the same route as discussed here, I would be
> very interested in hearing what equipment you went with and what your
> experience and satisfaction has been.

Five years ago I went with the older, used GPS idea. After the fact, I
wished I'd gone ahead and gotten a 430.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Steven Barnes]

We have a dedicated DME box in our Cherokee. So, I can do VOR/DME or LOC/DME
approaches easily.
Question (with the understanding it varies from unit to unit):

Where does the DME info come from when using an IFR cert GPS? Correct me if
I'm wrong, but a box like the GNC300XL doesn't have NAV, so there's no
"tuning" of the localizer on the GPS. What do you "dial in" to get a DME
readout? Do you have to change your waypoint from the airport you were
navigating to?
I flew behind a 530/430 a couple times. On those boxes you can actually
"tune in" the localizer. The 530 displays a GPS distance in a dedicated
field on one of the pages. The 430 did not.

I'm sure it's a matter of just getting familiar with the box you're flying
behind, but to me, having a dedicated DME box in my panel gives me one less
thing to do.

Now, having said that, last weekend I think my partner & I discovered the
glideslope in our KI214 (i think that's the right number. it's the old nav
head hooked to an older King 170-B) was flagged during some practice
approaches. Ugh. We had the same problem last year, & spend $1,700 getting a
replacement put in. If this one has shot craps, I want to look for some
newer equipment. I've always been lusting after a 430, but it's a bit out of
reach at the moment.

Sorry for rambling. My wallet hurts.

"Maule Driver" > wrote in message
om...
> I have a 'low ball' setup in my Maule. A certified GNC300XL (kind of
> second generation)with comm, one NavCom with slope, and that's it. The
> 300XL must go used for a song but the installation is the real cost.
> Gives you DME and ADF equivalence and GPS approaches. I'm putting the
> 396 in for weather and GPS backup.
>
> john smith wrote:
> > Buy used equipment.
> > Panel mounted COM and GPS.
> > The handheld is for backup and providing information not required by the
> > regs.

[Rick Beebe]

Dan Luke wrote:

> "three-eight-hotel" wrote:
>
>>I just did a quick search and found an overhauled GNC300XL for about
>>$2600 (and saw another for around $2300), which like you said, gives
>>me
>>COM, DME and GPS approaches!
>
>
> Beware: the GNC300 will require the installation of external
> annunciation, etc. which will add considerably to the cost. The 430
> does not require this. Make sure you get estimates from your avionics
> shop for various installations before you commit to anything.

Excellent advice.

> Five years ago I went with the older, used GPS idea. After the fact, I
> wished I'd gone ahead and gotten a 430.

I was headed down that path. In fact I bought nearly everything I needed
on eBay (except I couldn't find an annunciator). I hauled it all down to
the avionics shop for an estimate and, as usual, I was shocked. We had a
long talk--pros, cons, etc--and I ended up putting in a 430. If you
explore this you may be surprised at the final cost--integration is a
beautiful thing.

I sold everything I had bought back on eBay except for a KX-155 which
became my second nav/com, a KI-206 indicator and a couple splitters. I
did end up spending more money but I haven't regretted the decision at all.

--Rick

[[email protected]]

On 27-Aug-2005, "Steven Barnes" > wrote:

> Where does the DME info come from when using an IFR cert GPS?


From the GPS. Approach certified GPS can be used in lieu of DME for
determining position on an instrument approach that requires DME.
--
-Elliott Drucker

[Thomas Borchert]

Dan,

> Five years ago I went with the older, used GPS idea. After the fact, I
> wished I'd gone ahead and gotten a 430.
>

Can't those be had used by now?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Dan Luke]

"Thomas Borchert" wrote:

>> Five years ago I went with the older, used GPS idea. After the fact,
>> I
>> wished I'd gone ahead and gotten a 430.
>>
>
> Can't those be had used by now?

Yes. They're expensive even used, though.

[Dave Butler]

three-eight-hotel wrote:
>
> So I started thinking.... (no wise cracks please) Portable handheld
> with the many wis-bang features that it does have (downloadable Wx,
> terrain display, etc.) and take the difference and put it towards 2nd
> COM and possibly DME (for shooting those DME required approaches)
> OR.... Panel mount with built in COM, legal DME and do Wx and terrain
> planning the hard way???

I've been thinking, too. My background: I have a partnership in a Mooney that's
just now getting GNS480 IFR GPS capability (it's in the shop right now). I
installed a first-generation (GX50) IFR GPS in a plane I owned previously. I
have experience with 3 handheld GPSs, a Garmin 90, GPSMAP 196, and I just
received my GPSMAP 396 last week.

I'm thinking if I ever went back to sole ownership, it would probably be
something in the 172/Cherokee capability range, and I'd install the GPSMAP 396
panel mounting bracket and get along without the IFR certification. In a plane
of that class, I'd prefer the convenience and capabilities of the 396, with
weather and terrain. Panel mounting would remove the disadvantages of wires
running all over the cockpit, which I detest.

There's a panel mounting bracket for the 396. I guess the idea is you can
*legally* have the bracket permanently installed, although permanent
installation of the 396 itself probably could not be certified.

I think there's a lot of added value to having something like the 396 without
certification. You can do a lot with it when enroute IFR, for a relatively small
investment. The additional investment and capability that comes with IFR enroute
/ terminal / approach certification doesn't have such a good cost/benefit ratio.

>
> Other benefits to the handheld are using it in the car, just watching
> Wx at home (for fun), identifying the hot fishing spots on Eagle Lake
> and being able to get back to them quickly... ;-)

I plan to use my 396 in the car. It will replace the 196 I use in my car now.
Right now I have the 396 set up in my living room watching hurricane Katrina.

Dave

[Newps]

wrote:

> On 27-Aug-2005, "Steven Barnes" > wrote:
>
>
>>Where does the DME info come from when using an IFR cert GPS?
>
>
>
> From the GPS. Approach certified GPS can be used in lieu of DME for
> determining position on an instrument approach that requires DME.



An enroute/terminal GPS can also be used on an approach for necessary
DME information. I use my GX55 for such purposes. Since no DME shacks
are in the database I use other navaids or intersections as my DME fix,
such as VOR's or the outer markers.

[xyzzy]

Dave Butler wrote:

>
> I'm thinking if I ever went back to sole ownership, it would probably be
> something in the 172/Cherokee capability range, and I'd install the
> GPSMAP 396 panel mounting bracket and get along without the IFR
> certification. In a plane of that class, I'd prefer the convenience and
> capabilities of the 396, with weather and terrain. Panel mounting would
> remove the disadvantages of wires running all over the cockpit, which I
> detest.

Just to clarify, are you saying your plane would be IFR certified but
you wouldn't bother with an IFR certified GPS? So you would use
VOR/LOC/DME etc for official IFR flying and the GPS for situational
awareness?

> There's a panel mounting bracket for the 396. I guess the idea is you
> can *legally* have the bracket permanently installed, although permanent
> installation of the 396 itself probably could not be certified.

I read elsewhere (can't remember where) that you also have to be careful
about permanently installing the wires because it starts to cross the line.

> I think there's a lot of added value to having something like the 396
> without certification. You can do a lot with it when enroute IFR, for a
> relatively small investment. The additional investment and capability
> that comes with IFR enroute / terminal / approach certification doesn't
> have such a good cost/benefit ratio.

That makes sense for today but what about the future? It seems that
the FAA is going in the direction of relying more on GPS approaches and
less on ground based navaids. Also a GPS approach to each end of the
runway obviates the need for a lot of circling approaches. It's
starting to look like more airports will be GPS-only or will have ILS
and to one runway and GPS only to the other Wouldn't that concern you?

Keep in mind that I am only an instrument student, not IFR rated, when I
give these opinions :)

[Dave Butler]

xyzzy wrote:
> Dave Butler wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm thinking if I ever went back to sole ownership, it would probably
>> be something in the 172/Cherokee capability range, and I'd install the
>> GPSMAP 396 panel mounting bracket and get along without the IFR
>> certification. In a plane of that class, I'd prefer the convenience
>> and capabilities of the 396, with weather and terrain. Panel mounting
>> would remove the disadvantages of wires running all over the cockpit,
>> which I detest.
>
>
> Just to clarify, are you saying your plane would be IFR certified but
> you wouldn't bother with an IFR certified GPS? So you would use
> VOR/LOC/DME etc for official IFR flying and the GPS for situational
> awareness?

Yes. Of course this is all just daydreaming. I don't currently own the plane we
are speculating about.

>
>> There's a panel mounting bracket for the 396. I guess the idea is you
>> can *legally* have the bracket permanently installed, although
>> permanent installation of the 396 itself probably could not be certified.
>
>
> I read elsewhere (can't remember where) that you also have to be careful
> about permanently installing the wires because it starts to cross the line.

Yes, I agree. I don't think the dust has settled on this issue yet.

>
>> I think there's a lot of added value to having something like the 396
>> without certification. You can do a lot with it when enroute IFR, for
>> a relatively small investment. The additional investment and
>> capability that comes with IFR enroute / terminal / approach
>> certification doesn't have such a good cost/benefit ratio.
>
>
> That makes sense for today but what about the future? It seems that
> the FAA is going in the direction of relying more on GPS approaches and
> less on ground based navaids. Also a GPS approach to each end of the
> runway obviates the need for a lot of circling approaches. It's
> starting to look like more airports will be GPS-only or will have ILS
> and to one runway and GPS only to the other Wouldn't that concern you?

Yes. This might be a shortsighted suggestion.

>
> Keep in mind that I am only an instrument student, not IFR rated, when I
> give these opinions :)

Your questions and opinions have merit.

Dave

[three-eight-hotel]

hmmmm... I think I'm starting to come around, full-circle. Maybe
spinning around in circles is more like it... ;-)

I'm hearing a lot of valuable feedback, and it's got me leaning back
towards the IFR certified panel mount. It seems like that would
address the main weaknesses of my current configuration, and would be
in line with where the technology seems to be going.

Some other key factor to my current position "on the fence" are:
1. Installation costs of something like a GNC300XL, as a few have
mentioned
2. Do I really plan to weave my way through serious T-Cells (not at the
moment)
3. One of the biggies - could I justify or afford the $50/mo. XM
subscription to take full advantage of the 396 (not at the moment ;-)

I really like the idea of having the handheld, and would probably be
happy with the features "out of the box", but at that point, it's
still, really just a "backup". Going with a GNS type of configuration
would add value to my plane and give me a much more current (looking
and functional) panel.

I'm still on the fence, and am not ready to pull the trigger just yet,
so I'll keep monitoring the discussions, as there seems to be a new
thread popping up every day!

Thanks again for the feedback!

Best Regards,
Todd

[Maule Driver]

I am a happy user of the 300XL. From a cost standpoint, installation is
an issue (yes, an annuciator panel is needed and a Nav head - not worse
than anything else, just not cheaper). Only the unit is cheaper.

While it would add value to your use of the a/c, it wouldn't add any
value in a market sense. I think market value starts at the 430...

If I were doing it now, I would have to put a 430 in - perhaps used.

From a flying utility standpoint, since you have a minimal panel you
have flown with, perhaps the handheld would be the best value right now
just for the weather. The $30/month aviator lite package provides the
bulk of the value and a great value I expect it to be in my everyday
flying.

I guess I'm suggesting a critical look at the flying you do and
comparing that to the options. Where I live (SE US), being able to look
down route, see the storms, and strategizing to avoid them is 80% of
summer flying.

Oh, and remember as soon as you go certified panel mount, you need
refereshed data. About $50 a month to stay absolutely current. Garmin
makes it hard to save money for those willing to be less than current.

three-eight-hotel wrote:
> hmmmm... I think I'm starting to come around, full-circle. Maybe
> spinning around in circles is more like it... ;-)
>
> I'm hearing a lot of valuable feedback, and it's got me leaning back
> towards the IFR certified panel mount. It seems like that would
> address the main weaknesses of my current configuration, and would be
> in line with where the technology seems to be going.
>
> Some other key factor to my current position "on the fence" are:
> 1. Installation costs of something like a GNC300XL, as a few have
> mentioned
> 2. Do I really plan to weave my way through serious T-Cells (not at the
> moment)
> 3. One of the biggies - could I justify or afford the $50/mo. XM
> subscription to take full advantage of the 396 (not at the moment ;-)
>
> I really like the idea of having the handheld, and would probably be
> happy with the features "out of the box", but at that point, it's
> still, really just a "backup". Going with a GNS type of configuration
> would add value to my plane and give me a much more current (looking
> and functional) panel.
>
> I'm still on the fence, and am not ready to pull the trigger just yet,
> so I'll keep monitoring the discussions, as there seems to be a new
> thread popping up every day!
>
> Thanks again for the feedback!
>
> Best Regards,
> Todd
>

[Dan Luke]

"three-eight-hotel" wrote:

> 2. Do I really plan to weave my way through serious T-Cells (not at
> the
> moment)

Depends on where you fly. If you aren't willing to weave your way
through serious T-Cells, you won't fly much down South for half the
year.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[three-eight-hotel]

17. Dan Luke Aug 30, 2:24 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: "Dan Luke" > - Find messages by this
author
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 16:24:48 -0500
Local: Tues, Aug 30 2005 2:24 pm
Subject: Re: 396 plus COM or GNS x30???
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse



>> 2. Do I really plan to weave my way through serious T-Cells (not at
>> the
>> moment)


> Depends on where you fly. If you aren't willing to weave your way
> through serious T-Cells, you won't fly much down South for half the
> year.

Agreed... I should have specified that I live in "severe clear"
Northern California.

Any instrument time I get is typically with a safety pilot, or would be
popping to VFR-on-top (which I have still yet to do). With a
single-engine airplane, I am hesitant to do real IFR, unless I have to
(so far, haven't had to). I would like to fly over the Sacramento
valley some time and get some real approaches, when the fog has rolled
in, but I've yet to do that also. I plan to make weekend trips to the
coast which will all but assure me of .1 hrs. of actual, on occaision.

My ultimate goal is get the commercial and CFI rating. I want to be as
proficient as I possibly can and confident that I can handle any IFR
situtations that come up. Proper planning should keep me out of
"un-intentional" IFR, but should something happen, I want to be
confident and proficient. The only way that's going to happen is
practice, practice, practice, and I would like to have my plane
properly equipped.

If I did live in the south or the mid-west, I'm sure I would be talking
an entirely different game. I am envious of the experience you guys
get, but not so much as I wish that weather on NorCal... ;-)

Best Regards,
Todd