Garmin buys UPS AT...

[Lenny Sawyer]

Big news...
http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/corporate/072403b.html



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Marco L]

If you don't like Garmin, go buy a KLN-94, simple as that. There are enough
KLN-series GPS units out there to make the Garmin dominance far from a
monopoly.



"The Customer Suffers" > wrote in message
...
> I'd expect prices to soon go thru the roof, now that they have the
> monopoly over the aviation GPS market.



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

[Maule Driver]

"The Customer Suffers" > wrote in message
...
> I'd expect prices to soon go thru the roof, now that they have the
> monopoly over the aviation GPS market.

I wonder... in a market this small one could argue that 2 dominant players
is all it can hold over the long term. Will certainly keep prices favorable
to the manufacturers but stability for customers might be a benefit. I
would hate to 'invest' in a panel and have the company fail 3 years from
now. Just a thought.

[[email protected]]

The Customer Suffers wrote:

> I'd expect prices to soon go thru the roof, now that they have the
> monopoly over the aviation GPS market.

I think you meant to say light aircraft GPS market. No high end biz
jets or airliners have Garmin equipment. Compared to what the big boys
use, the Garmin 530 is a stubborn toy.

[Jonathan Goodish]

In article >,
"Dave Stadt" > wrote:
> "Dennis O'Connor" > wrote in message
> ...
> > If you can't beat em - buy em!
>
> In this case it was......If you can't beat em - sell out to em.
>


It would appear that UPSAT had technology that Garmin did not, which
would indicate to me that Garmin was the technological underdog. If
there was nothing there for Garmin, they wouldn't have bothered with the
aquisition.



JKG

[Aaron Coolidge]

In rec.aviation.owning wrote:

: I think you meant to say light aircraft GPS market. No high end biz
: jets or airliners have Garmin equipment. Compared to what the big boys
: use, the Garmin 530 is a stubborn toy.

Hmmm, I'm not sure what you mean by airliner, but most airliners today
are flying with DME/DME RNAV (like a KNS-80). The stuff that makes a lot
of takeoffs - commuter airliners - probably has 2 VORs and a DME, no
autopilot.

One of my friends was flying with a major east-coast commuter in the
San Juan area. Their ATR72's had KLN89B GPS units.
--
Aaron Coolidge (N9376J)

[Marco L]

I think that would only be part of the picture. Acquisitions are rarely that
cut-and-dry. Other factors that may have played into the decision include
reduction in competition, staff augmentation, clients (there may be an
underlying lucrative deal to supply UPS aircraft), R&D contracts (ADS-B),
and the all-too-underestimated "personal" reasons. Min worked with some of
these guys back in the Bendix-King days.

We'll never know the full picture unless we hear it from one of the
insider's themselves.

Marco

"Jonathan Goodish" wrote in message
>
> It would appear that UPSAT had technology that Garmin did not, which
> would indicate to me that Garmin was the technological underdog. If
> there was nothing there for Garmin, they wouldn't have bothered with the
> aquisition.

>
> JKG



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

[[email protected]]

Aaron Coolidge wrote:

> In rec.aviation.owning wrote:
>
> : I think you meant to say light aircraft GPS market. No high end biz
> : jets or airliners have Garmin equipment. Compared to what the big boys
> : use, the Garmin 530 is a stubborn toy.
>
> Hmmm, I'm not sure what you mean by airliner, but most airliners today
> are flying with DME/DME RNAV (like a KNS-80). The stuff that makes a lot
> of takeoffs - commuter airliners - probably has 2 VORs and a DME, no
> autopilot.

The King unit is a VOR/DME rho/theta unit. When the first glass cockpit
airliners came out circa 1980, they had triple IRS units as the primary
platform with DME/DME as the primary update in domestic airspace. When
DME/DME update is available it is vastly superior to VOR/DME update. Also,
although GPS was not part of this LNAV/FMS suite until perhaps 10 years ago,
these early systems had full airway databases, and the ability to input data
without turning knobs.

The later systems use GPS as the primary sensor, and many of them can use RF
legs, etc, etc.

But, to compare a full IRS database system with DME/DME updating to the King
gludge is major apples and oranges.

>

>
>
> One of my friends was flying with a major east-coast commuter in the
> San Juan area. Their ATR72's had KLN89B GPS units.
> --
> Aaron Coolidge (N9376J)

[Tarver Engineering]

"Aaron Coolidge" > wrote in message
...
> In rec.aviation.owning wrote:
>
> : I think you meant to say light aircraft GPS market. No high end biz
> : jets or airliners have Garmin equipment. Compared to what the big boys
> : use, the Garmin 530 is a stubborn toy.
>
> Hmmm, I'm not sure what you mean by airliner, but most airliners today
> are flying with DME/DME RNAV (like a KNS-80). The stuff that makes a lot
> of takeoffs - commuter airliners - probably has 2 VORs and a DME, no
> autopilot.

For the high end business jets, Global, UNS and CMC all make FMS/GPS in one.

> One of my friends was flying with a major east-coast commuter in the
> San Juan area. Their ATR72's had KLN89B GPS units.

The Garmins are going in up through turbo props too, but there is a
possibility panel mounts will begin to show up in 727s and other types near
end of life.

John P. Tarver, MS/PE

[karl gruber]

********If you don't like Garmin, go buy a KLN-94, simple as that. There are
enough KLN-series GPS units out there to make the Garmin dominance far from
a monopoly.
**********


Unfortunately, King was slow to the GPS scene and never caught up. The
KLN-94 is ANCIENT technology compared to the latest Garmin/Upsat units.


Karl

[Ron Natalie]

"Jonathan Goodish" > wrote in message news:jgoodish-
> It would appear that UPSAT had technology that Garmin did not, which
> would indicate to me that Garmin was the technological underdog. If
> there was nothing there for Garmin, they wouldn't have bothered with the
> aquisition.

Most of it isn't the consumer avionics stuff but the ADS-B stuff etc...
Never could understand what Brown was doing owning that business anyhow.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> > > Never could understand what Brown was doing owning that business
anyhow.
> >
> > DME replacement.

> Doesn't explain why they need to own an avionics company. None of the
other
> cargo companies felt it necessary to develop their own avionics.

I wrote the wrong thing anyway Ron. What I should have written is "third
LRN replacement". Two spinning and one radio give a nice technology cross
check and I don't think anyone was making 6 wire distance, from a GPS.

John P. Tarver, MS/PE

[Scott Skylane]

Tarver Engineering wrote:
/snip/
>
> I wrote the wrong thing anyway Ron.

/snip/

John,

Keep repeating that line to yourself, over and over and over again.

The REAL reason Big Brown bought out IIMorrow was for their parcel
tracking software. They had been using IIMorrrow's software, and
decided it was so good, they wanted to keep development "in house". The
Apollo line of avionics was just a nicety to go along with the deal.

See
http://www.elogisticsmagazine.co.uk/magazine/06/6-feature4.shtml
about halfway down the page.

Quote UPS:
"Our decision to sell is based on the fact that our airline has matured
and ongoing development and marketing of aviation technology is not part
of the long-term strategic direction of UPS," said Tom Weidemeyer,
president of UPS Airlines.

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane

[Marco L]

Totally agree, that's why I have a GNS430 ;) Not looking forward to
shelling out $1500 for the WAAS upgrade. $500 for terrain data I can take.

You would figure that Honeywell would have some technology sharing in the
works...

Marco


"karl gruber" > wrote in message
...
> ********If you don't like Garmin, go buy a KLN-94, simple as that. There
are
> enough KLN-series GPS units out there to make the Garmin dominance far
from
> a monopoly.
> **********
>
>
> Unfortunately, King was slow to the GPS scene and never caught up. The
> KLN-94 is ANCIENT technology compared to the latest Garmin/Upsat units.
>
>
> Karl
>
>



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

[Dennis O'Connor]

I don't know how their relative sales volumes were, what the ROI was, etc...
But I do know what I like and increasingly I am/was looking at the UPS line
for when I have to stuff the panel on my my RV-7 in 18 months - the CNX-80
had really caught my fancy as the #1 nav/com/vor/gps/ils box with a backup
com and a Garmin 196 for nav backup...... I do think their price on the
SL-30 / SL-40 was excessive compared to the Garmin stuff...
We will never know because uniform pricing will set in very rapidly under
single corporate ownership...

Denny

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
.com...
>
> "Dennis O'Connor" > wrote in message
> ...
> > If you can't beat em - buy em!
>
> In this case it was......If you can't beat em - sell out to em.
>
>
> >
> > "The Customer Suffers" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > I'd expect prices to soon go thru the roof, now that they have the
> > > monopoly over the aviation GPS market.
> >
> >
>
>

[Tarver Engineering]

"Scott Skylane" > wrote in message
...
> Tarver Engineering wrote:
> /snip/
> >
> > I wrote the wrong thing anyway Ron.
>
> /snip/
>
> John,
>
> Keep repeating that line to yourself, over and over and over again.

UPS had 2 turning and one radio for LRN and IIMorrow filled their need.

> The REAL reason Big Brown bought out IIMorrow was for their parcel
> tracking software. They had been using IIMorrrow's software, and
> decided it was so good, they wanted to keep development "in house". The
> Apollo line of avionics was just a nicety to go along with the deal.

There was a real need for a GPS Tracor OMEGA replacement and UPS could get
what they needed with Apollo.

> See
> http://www.elogisticsmagazine.co.uk/magazine/06/6-feature4.shtml
> about halfway down the page.
>
> Quote UPS:
> "Our decision to sell is based on the fact that our airline has matured
> and ongoing development and marketing of aviation technology is not part
> of the long-term strategic direction of UPS," said Tom Weidemeyer,
> president of UPS Airlines.

I doubt UPS ever had any interest in providing avionics to small GA.

John P. Tarver, MS/PE

[Snowbird]

wrote in message >...
> The Customer Suffers wrote:
> > I'd expect prices to soon go thru the roof, now that they have the
> > monopoly over the aviation GPS market.

> I think you meant to say light aircraft GPS market. No high end biz
> jets or airliners have Garmin equipment. Compared to what the big boys
> use, the Garmin 530 is a stubborn toy.

So, what do the "high end biz jets" use?

Per acquaintance flying Falcons w/ airline pilot friends,
his equipment was far better than theirs. Judging from
what I'd seen peeking through cockpit doors, would have
to agree.

Cheers,
Sydney

[[email protected]]

Snowbird wrote:

> wrote in message >...
> > The Customer Suffers wrote:
> > > I'd expect prices to soon go thru the roof, now that they have the
> > > monopoly over the aviation GPS market.
>
> > I think you meant to say light aircraft GPS market. No high end biz
> > jets or airliners have Garmin equipment. Compared to what the big boys
> > use, the Garmin 530 is a stubborn toy.
>
> So, what do the "high end biz jets" use?
>
> Per acquaintance flying Falcons w/ airline pilot friends,
> his equipment was far better than theirs. Judging from
> what I'd seen peeking through cockpit doors, would have
> to agree.

No doubt, there are more state-of-the-art biz jets than there are airliners.
Two high-end airliners that come to mind are the 777 and latest 737.

But, even the "so so" airliners are legions ahead of light aircraft.

The best avionics suite today would include:

1. Triple IRUs as the primary position and attitude platform.
2. Dual FMS/LNAV-VNAV systems with augmentation of the IRU mixed postion
sensor in order of perference: GPS, DME/DME, and way down the list, VOR/DME.
Many of these aircraft have scanning DMEs that can "see" up to 10 DME stations
virtually at the same time.
3.Dual, independent navdatabases, with acess to airways and jet routes by
typing in flight-plan sequence logic; i.e., LAX.LOOP1.DAG.J134.STL
4. Autoflight system, with dual, independent, stall protected autothrottles
systems, and capability to fly RF legs (radius-to-fix legs). Dual,
independent flight directors.
5. EVS.
6. Electronic flight bag, including approach charts and aircraft handbook.

[Neal]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 10:19:41 -0500, "Dan Luke"
<c172rgATbellsouthDOTnet> wrote:

>"Lenny Sawyer" wrote:
>> Big news...
>
>Hard to see how this can be anything but bad news for GA aircraft owners.
>UPS was the only one keeping any real pressure on Garmin in the NAV/COM/GPS
>market.
>
>It will be interesting to see what happens to the UPSAT products. Will they
>suffer the Not Invented Here stigma and die a lingering death?

And folks here were just recently lamenting the end-of-life for the
GPS-90 handheld database updates... I'm kinda glad now that I didn't
buy that GX-55 panel-mount last autumn.

[Neal]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 20:09:31 -0400, Roy Smith > wrote:

>Neal > wrote:
>> And folks here were just recently lamenting the end-of-life for the
>> GPS-90 handheld database updates... I'm kinda glad now that I didn't
>> buy that GX-55 panel-mount last autumn.
>
>I've got a Garmin 90. I havn't updated the database since the day I got
>it (7 years ago?). I carry it for emergency navigation. The airports
>havn't moved since then, which is mostly what I'm interested in.
>There's the odd navaid or intersection that's changed, but for the most
>part, this stuff just doesn't change that quickly.
>
>For primary IFR navigation, sure you need an up to date database.
>Especially for approaches. But for emergency backup? Hardly.

If you use one for even just VFR, you really need current airport
identifiers. In the past year and a half, there's been about a half
dozen or more airport identifier changes and/or airports that have
closed completely, within a hundred miles of my home base.

In an emergency in unfamiliar territory when you hit that NRST button
and it steers you towards that airport that shows to be in gliding
range, and you turn that direction and establish your glide only to
find a brand new neighborhood full of freshly built houses instead of
a runway...

[Craig Davidson]

Lenny Sawyer wrote in message >...
>Big news...
>http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/corporate/072403b.html
>


The Customer Suffers wrote in message ...
>I'd expect prices to soon go thru the roof, now that they have the
>monopoly over the aviation GPS market.


From: http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/corporate/072403b.html

"UPS Aviation Technologies, headquartered in Salem, Ore., designs and
manufactures multiple lines of communications, navigation and surveillance
products for general aviation and air transport customers. The company
employs about 150 people"

Garmin buys a company of 150 people and you think they have dominated an
entire industry?

[Julian Scarfe]

> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 20:09:31 -0400, Roy Smith > wrote:

> >For primary IFR navigation, sure you need an up to date database.
> >Especially for approaches. But for emergency backup? Hardly.

"Neal" > wrote in message
...

> If you use one for even just VFR, you really need current airport
> identifiers. In the past year and a half, there's been about a half
> dozen or more airport identifier changes and/or airports that have
> closed completely, within a hundred miles of my home base.
>
> In an emergency in unfamiliar territory when you hit that NRST button
> and it steers you towards that airport that shows to be in gliding
> range, and you turn that direction and establish your glide only to
> find a brand new neighborhood full of freshly built houses instead of
> a runway...

Seems like another good reason *not* to use the NRST button!

In an engine failure situation, you probably still have your panel
equipment, and you certainly still have your situational awareness and chart
to tell you about suitable emergency landing spots.

I think the sort of emergency Roy is thinking of is a total electrical
failure in IMC. In that case you just need well established waypoints to
get you where you were intending to go. A handheld GPS with an outdated
database does a pretty good job of that.

Julian Scarfe

[[email protected]]

Neal wrote:

>
> In an emergency in unfamiliar territory when you hit that NRST button
> and it steers you towards that airport that shows to be in gliding
> range, and you turn that direction and establish your glide only to
> find a brand new neighborhood full of freshly built houses instead of
> a runway...

Well stated. Even in an emergency you're required to use *current*
information appropriate to the PIC's intended course of action. How current
the database needs to be as to airport information is a question that would
only be answered by the arm-chair quarterbacks.~

[Tarver Engineering]

"Lenny Sawyer" > wrote in message
...
> Big news...
> http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/corporate/072403b.html

The best part is, you'll get to buy superior technology from people you
already like.

[Roy Smith]

"Craig Davidson" > wrote:
> Garmin buys a company of 150 people and you think they have dominated an
> entire industry?

Industry? No. But the field of GA GPS? Absolutely. When it comes to
GPS receivers for general aviation, Garmin and UPS are not just #1 and
#2, there really isn't a #3. King, Lowrance, and Northstar are all
pretty much non-players at this point. Collins makes great hardware,
but not for the GA market.

This is the kind of merger the FTC would normally disallow on anti-trust
grounds. Imagine Coke buying Pepsi. On the other hand, the market is
so small, I doubt the FTC cares much.

[Dan Luke]

"Roy Smith" wrote:
> > Garmin buys a company of 150 people and you think they have dominated an
> > entire industry?
>
> Industry? No. But the field of GA GPS? Absolutely. When it comes to
> GPS receivers for general aviation, Garmin and UPS are not just #1 and
> #2, there really isn't a #3. King, Lowrance, and Northstar are all
> pretty much non-players at this point.

True.

The more I think about this, the less I like it. Garmin will now have about
as much competition in this market as Microsoft does in pc OS's. <shudder>
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Scott Moore]

Lenny Sawyer wrote:
>
> Big news...
> http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/corporate/072403b.html
>

Almost sounds like a joke. Of only three real players, two GPS makers just merged.

--
For most men, true happiness can only be achieved with a woman.
Also for most men, true happiness can only be achieved without a woman.
Sharp minds have noted that these two rules tend to conflict.....

[Scott Moore]

Jonathan Goodish wrote:
>
> In article >,
> "Dave Stadt" > wrote:
> > "Dennis O'Connor" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > If you can't beat em - buy em!
> >
> > In this case it was......If you can't beat em - sell out to em.
> >
>
> It would appear that UPSAT had technology that Garmin did not, which
> would indicate to me that Garmin was the technological underdog. If
> there was nothing there for Garmin, they wouldn't have bothered with the
> aquisition.
>
> JKG

Or you could be a cynic and say that Garmin didn't like UPS offering
plates and better display colors, so now they won't have to.

--
For most men, true happiness can only be achieved with a woman.
Also for most men, true happiness can only be achieved without a woman.
Sharp minds have noted that these two rules tend to conflict.....

[Scott Moore]

The Customer Suffers wrote:
>
> I'd expect prices to soon go thru the roof, now that they have the
> monopoly over the aviation GPS market.

The CNX80 was clearly designed to be a 430 knockoff, so there is just
as clearly going to be a product line reduction. However, Garmin would
be nuts to kill the better display capabilities, WAAS and plate displays
UPS has done, because that would create a bad impression with its customers.

Everyone agrees that the 430/530 series is a nice unit, but it was not
the technological best. THe color display is limited, there is no WAAS
solution, no approach plate solution, no terrain, no airway, and on and
on. Garmin won partially on price (yes, having an all in one unit IS
dramatically cheaper to install), partially on being first with the most,
and very much on customer service, which in my mind is the best in the
business. In short, Garmin is not your father's monopolistic company,
and big complacent companies in avionics DO fail, just look at King.

If Garmin wants to be the new King, they will use the chance to kill
better UPS products. If not, they will kill the CNX80 and push the high
end UPS stuff, then revamp the GNS line quickly to cover everything
UPS had going.

I highly suspect that Garmin is just getting started, so I think it will
be the latter. Garmin will be the leader in WAAS, ADS-B when it becomes
real, and probally displays as well.

--
For most men, true happiness can only be achieved with a woman.
Also for most men, true happiness can only be achieved without a woman.
Sharp minds have noted that these two rules tend to conflict.....

[Scott Moore]

wrote:
>
> The Customer Suffers wrote:
>
> > I'd expect prices to soon go thru the roof, now that they have the
> > monopoly over the aviation GPS market.
>
> I think you meant to say light aircraft GPS market. No high end biz
> jets or airliners have Garmin equipment. Compared to what the big boys
> use, the Garmin 530 is a stubborn toy.

Bull*hit. The airliners all want their new equipment to look and act just
like an FMS so they don't have to retrain. Garmin has traction with high
end light airplanes, and thats just as it should be. When/if garmin makes
airline equipment, their light airplane lines will go downhill.

--
For most men, true happiness can only be achieved with a woman.
Also for most men, true happiness can only be achieved without a woman.
Sharp minds have noted that these two rules tend to conflict.....

[[email protected]]

Scott Moore wrote:

> wrote:
> >
> > The Customer Suffers wrote:
> >
> > > I'd expect prices to soon go thru the roof, now that they have the
> > > monopoly over the aviation GPS market.
> >
> > I think you meant to say light aircraft GPS market. No high end biz
> > jets or airliners have Garmin equipment. Compared to what the big boys
> > use, the Garmin 530 is a stubborn toy.
>
> Bull*hit. The airliners all want their new equipment to look and act just
> like an FMS so they don't have to retrain. Garmin has traction with high
> end light airplanes, and thats just as it should be. When/if garmin makes
> airline equipment, their light airplane lines will go downhill.

Anytime someuses "BS,' it probably means they are bluffing. If the airlines
new equipment looks and acts just like an FMS, to paraphrase you, dosn't that
make it an FMS?

[[email protected]]

Craig Davidson wrote:

"UPS Aviation Technologies, headquartered in Salem, Ore., designs and

> manufactures multiple lines of communications, navigation and surveillance
> products for general aviation and air transport customers. The company
> employs about 150 people"
>
> Garmin buys a company of 150 people and you think they have dominated an
> entire industry?

The UPS avionics effort was an attempt by the freight-hauling parent to design
some of their own avionics for their fleet, then as the thing grew its own
life, some of them prevailed to make G/A goodies. This likely came to
interfere with the core business, thus they were more than ready to dump this
subsiderary.

[Tarver Engineering]

> wrote in message ...
>
>
> Craig Davidson wrote:
>
> "UPS Aviation Technologies, headquartered in Salem, Ore., designs and
>
> > manufactures multiple lines of communications, navigation and
surveillance
> > products for general aviation and air transport customers. The company
> > employs about 150 people"
> >
> > Garmin buys a company of 150 people and you think they have dominated an
> > entire industry?
>
> The UPS avionics effort was an attempt by the freight-hauling parent to
design
> some of their own avionics for their fleet, then as the thing grew its own
> life, some of them prevailed to make G/A goodies. This likely came to
> interfere with the core business, thus they were more than ready to dump
this
> subsiderary.

Thirty nine million, in the current market, looks like smiling all the way
to the bank to me.

[Peter Duniho]

> wrote in message ...
> The UPS avionics effort was an attempt by the freight-hauling parent to
design
> some of their own avionics for their fleet, then as the thing grew its own
> life, some of them prevailed to make G/A goodies.

Huh? Hardly. The UPS line of avionics is basically the same as it was
before UPS bought it, along with the company, from II Morrow. The
"freight-hauling parent" didn't do much design, if any, nor was it intended
specifically for their own fleet. It was targeted at GA from the outset, by
the original designer: II Morrow.

Frankly, I thought it was always a little strange that UPS bought out II
Morrow, but their current choice of how to dispose of their purchase is
going to be very bad for the avionics market. There's going to be even less
price competition than there was before, and I will be surprised if Garmin
leaves both product lines available intact.

Anyone know how to get the FTC to notice this and do something about it?

Pete

[Roy Smith]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote:
> Frankly, I thought it was always a little strange that UPS bought out II
> Morrow,

Everybody seems to think UPS wanted GPS for their air fleet. I suspect
they were a lot more interested in it for their ground fleet. For every
cargo jet they operate, they've probably got 100, if not 1000, trucks.

[Don Tuite]

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 09:57:30 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
> wrote:

.. . .
>Huh? Hardly. The UPS line of avionics is basically the same as it was
>before UPS bought it, along with the company, from II Morrow. The
>"freight-hauling parent" didn't do much design, if any, nor was it intended
>specifically for their own fleet. It was targeted at GA from the outset, by
>the original designer: II Morrow.
>
>Frankly, I thought it was always a little strange that UPS bought out II
>Morrow,

IIRC, II Morrow's original business plan was to use LORAN to provide
truck and taxi dispatchers with up-to-the-minute location info on the
vehicles in their fleets. They probably had UPS seed money.

>but their current choice of how to dispose of their purchase is
>going to be very bad for the avionics market. There's going to be even less
>price competition than there was before, and I will be surprised if Garmin
>leaves both product lines available intact.
>
>Anyone know how to get the FTC to notice this and do something about it?

Oh my. Where have all the rec.aviation.libertarians gone? ?;- *

Is Garmin going to pull the operation out of Oregon?

Don

[Mike Weller]

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 10:21:17 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
> wrote:

>Two spinning and a radio, trans oceanic.

OK, I'll bite. What does "Two spinning and a radio, trans oceanic"
mean? It sounds like a Jimmy Buffet song, but I just can't place it.

>John P. Tarver, MS/PE
>

Mike Weller

[Robert M. Gary]

Maybe Garmin products will improve now. Anyone who has flown behind an
MX-20 looks at a GNS530 and says, 'Hey look, something for the kids!'.




Lenny Sawyer > wrote in message >...
> Big news...
> http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/corporate/072403b.html
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
> http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
> ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Neal]

On 28 Jul 2003 12:11:35 -0700, (Robert M. Gary)
wrote:

>Maybe Garmin products will improve now. Anyone who has flown behind an
>MX-20 looks at a GNS530 and says, 'Hey look, something for the kids!'.

Now that's cruel!

[Mark T. Mueller]

The Garmin reps at OSH would not talk about merger plans at all, nor would
they comment whether the current product line would be continued or
supported.

The UPSAT CNX-80 was a direct broadsides at the 430/530, and may have been
the only reason Garmin announced a reasonable upgrade for the 430/530 to
meet the 5 Hz update rate for WAAS cert (but still on the drawing boards.)
Otherwise, I am sure Garmin would have just come out with a 435/535 and told
us suckers who bought too early to just "trade it in"... I will be curious
to see if the CNX-80s actually ship in any sizeable numbers, or if those
with the units on order are given an opportunity to get a 530 instead...

Didn't Goodrich (now L3) relable MX-20s? What are they going to do?

I have a strong suspision the incentive for Garmin to actually provide good
end user support and fair pricing has just gone away. I have been
disappointed with Garmin's response to datalink for the 430/530 line (I have
had avionics installers tell me not to get it, and they were selling the
things...) I was told by Garmin the 430/530 would continue to use the
GDL49/EchoFlight system only, and the new WxWorks broadcast system would
only be for the G1000.

Then again, they did lose a big auto deal due to their non-competitive
pricing recently...



"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> > wrote in message ...
> > The UPS avionics effort was an attempt by the freight-hauling parent to
> design
> > some of their own avionics for their fleet, then as the thing grew its
own
> > life, some of them prevailed to make G/A goodies.
>
> Huh? Hardly. The UPS line of avionics is basically the same as it was
> before UPS bought it, along with the company, from II Morrow. The
> "freight-hauling parent" didn't do much design, if any, nor was it
intended
> specifically for their own fleet. It was targeted at GA from the outset,
by
> the original designer: II Morrow.
>
> Frankly, I thought it was always a little strange that UPS bought out II
> Morrow, but their current choice of how to dispose of their purchase is
> going to be very bad for the avionics market. There's going to be even
less
> price competition than there was before, and I will be surprised if Garmin
> leaves both product lines available intact.
>
> Anyone know how to get the FTC to notice this and do something about it?
>
> Pete
>
>