Handheld GPS adaptible to aviation

[[email protected]]

Hi, I'm a PP-ASEL student. Although the rental planes at my club have
pretty good nav equipment, I'm hoping to supplement them with a
handheld GPS that isn't expensive.

Mostly, I'm of the "your chart isn't going to lie to you" school of
pilotage and frugality. But your chart also doesn't tell you where you
are or what direction you're headed. So, I'd like to use an
inexpensive GPS with very basic mapping capability as a supplement to
VOR navigation for VFR.

Aviation GPS's need periodic map updates. So what I'd ideally like is
rather low-end land/marine unit with a basic map (cities, highways,
shoreline, other topographic features) that has available software to
create my own waypoint database of airports and navaids to supplement
the base map.

Anyone using something like that?

BTW, I am familiar with Brian Wade's excellent database for the
Magellan 315. But that's not a mapping unit. I'm trying to do
something similar but with a low-end mapping GPS.

Thanks

[Jim Macklin]

I think color is important, but I was just given a birthday
present, quite unexpected [the present, the b'day was
expected] of a Magellan Meridian Gold with a monochrome
display. It seems adequate and has a pretty good database
that includes airports. There is no terrain unless you buy
a detailed map database. It will work up to 951 mph and
17,500 meters.
Programming is not something I'd want to do in-flight unless
I had lots of time. I think my son bought it at Wal-Mart
for about $200. It runs 14 hours on 2 AA batteries if you
don't use the light.

I told him I wanted the Garmin 396, it's only $2500.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


> wrote in message
oups.com...
| Hi, I'm a PP-ASEL student. Although the rental planes at
my club have
| pretty good nav equipment, I'm hoping to supplement them
with a
| handheld GPS that isn't expensive.
|
| Mostly, I'm of the "your chart isn't going to lie to you"
school of
| pilotage and frugality. But your chart also doesn't tell
you where you
| are or what direction you're headed. So, I'd like to use
an
| inexpensive GPS with very basic mapping capability as a
supplement to
| VOR navigation for VFR.
|
| Aviation GPS's need periodic map updates. So what I'd
ideally like is
| rather low-end land/marine unit with a basic map (cities,
highways,
| shoreline, other topographic features) that has available
software to
| create my own waypoint database of airports and navaids to
supplement
| the base map.
|
| Anyone using something like that?
|
| BTW, I am familiar with Brian Wade's excellent database
for the
| Magellan 315. But that's not a mapping unit. I'm trying
to do
| something similar but with a low-end mapping GPS.
|
| Thanks
|

[Robert M. Gary]

If you are looking for something loo cost, consider buying a PDA with a
CF slot and just running something like PocketFMS (its free). You could
also buy a $15 copy of MS streets for it for use in the car too.

-Robert

[peter]

wrote:

> Aviation GPS's need periodic map updates. So what I'd ideally like is
> rather low-end land/marine unit with a basic map (cities, highways,
> shoreline, other topographic features) that has available software to
> create my own waypoint database of airports and navaids to supplement
> the base map.

The Garmin eTrex Legend is a small handheld that includes a reasonable
basemap (roughly the level of detail as state highway maps) and has a
PC interface cable for use with a wide variety of available software,
much of it free. It'll let you load in up to 1000 waypoints at a time.
Retails for around $140.

[Jim Macklin]

Just a follow-up, the Magellan Meridian Gold does have a
GOTO button and an airport list in the database. You can
select from airports nearest to your position with just a
few button pushes. I think most hand-helds will do this,
try them out to see what they'll do and how you like them.
They also have car power cigarette plugs available so you
can work as long as you need to and keep the batteries full.

But unless you buy an aviation unit, you won't have MOA, TFR
and other "bad" places, so you'll need to have that current
sectional and FSS brief data to stay out of the F-16
gunsights.

I think both Magellan and Garmin have downloadable SDK
programming instructions, you might be able to create the
NAVAID database, airports are included in the basic LAND map
on the units.


"peter" > wrote in message
ups.com...
| wrote:
|
| > Aviation GPS's need periodic map updates. So what I'd
ideally like is
| > rather low-end land/marine unit with a basic map
(cities, highways,
| > shoreline, other topographic features) that has
available software to
| > create my own waypoint database of airports and navaids
to supplement
| > the base map.
|
| The Garmin eTrex Legend is a small handheld that includes
a reasonable
| basemap (roughly the level of detail as state highway
maps) and has a
| PC interface cable for use with a wide variety of
available software,
| much of it free. It'll let you load in up to 1000
waypoints at a time.
| Retails for around $140.
|

[Stubby]

As a student you need to concentrate on your own navigation and flying
skills using the standard instruments. After you are out on your own
with a PPL, you can begin to use a GPS.


wrote:
> Hi, I'm a PP-ASEL student. Although the rental planes at my club have
> pretty good nav equipment, I'm hoping to supplement them with a
> handheld GPS that isn't expensive.
>
> Mostly, I'm of the "your chart isn't going to lie to you" school of
> pilotage and frugality. But your chart also doesn't tell you where you
> are or what direction you're headed. So, I'd like to use an
> inexpensive GPS with very basic mapping capability as a supplement to
> VOR navigation for VFR.
>
> Aviation GPS's need periodic map updates. So what I'd ideally like is
> rather low-end land/marine unit with a basic map (cities, highways,
> shoreline, other topographic features) that has available software to
> create my own waypoint database of airports and navaids to supplement
> the base map.
>
> Anyone using something like that?
>
> BTW, I am familiar with Brian Wade's excellent database for the
> Magellan 315. But that's not a mapping unit. I'm trying to do
> something similar but with a low-end mapping GPS.
>
> Thanks
>

[Jim Macklin]

I agree to that. In dense airspace with lots of traffic,
military and civilian, Class B and C and TFRs, use all you
can that is helpful, but a cobbled together land unit will
just be a distraction and a toy.
A good sectional and pre-flight planning an proper pilotage
will keep you out of trouble. Besides, sigh seeing is the
reason for flying, isn't it?


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Stubby" > wrote in
message ...
| As a student you need to concentrate on your own
navigation and flying
| skills using the standard instruments. After you are out
on your own
| with a PPL, you can begin to use a GPS.
|
|
| wrote:
| > Hi, I'm a PP-ASEL student. Although the rental planes
at my club have
| > pretty good nav equipment, I'm hoping to supplement them
with a
| > handheld GPS that isn't expensive.
| >
| > Mostly, I'm of the "your chart isn't going to lie to
you" school of
| > pilotage and frugality. But your chart also doesn't
tell you where you
| > are or what direction you're headed. So, I'd like to
use an
| > inexpensive GPS with very basic mapping capability as a
supplement to
| > VOR navigation for VFR.
| >
| > Aviation GPS's need periodic map updates. So what I'd
ideally like is
| > rather low-end land/marine unit with a basic map
(cities, highways,
| > shoreline, other topographic features) that has
available software to
| > create my own waypoint database of airports and navaids
to supplement
| > the base map.
| >
| > Anyone using something like that?
| >
| > BTW, I am familiar with Brian Wade's excellent database
for the
| > Magellan 315. But that's not a mapping unit. I'm
trying to do
| > something similar but with a low-end mapping GPS.
| >
| > Thanks
| >

[[email protected]]

I second the recommendation for PocketPC and PocketFMS. Inexpensive,
lots of options and in color. However, there is no guarantee for
currency of charts and reliability, so it is meant as a backup unit
only.

[Jim Macklin]

Everything except the windows and a chart is just an aid to
navigation.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


> wrote in message
oups.com...
| >>>As a student you need to concentrate on your own
navigation and flying
| skills using the standard instruments. After you are out
on your own
| with a PPL, you can begin to use a GPS<<<
|
| Right on, Stubby. Reminds me of a PPL student I had years
ago when I
| was actively instructing - he'd gotten a Garmin handheld
from his wife
| as a gift when he started taking lessons. The very first
time we got
| into the plane I saw him pull it out and start to set it
up, and when I
| asked what he was doing his answer was "I figured we'd
need this to
| navigate". To which I responded that he'd need to learn to
fly the
| plane first before navigating became an issue. After that
the GPS
| stayed in his flight bag. Gotta get the basics down first,
(pilotage
| being one of them) as I doubt DEs would even allow a GPS
to be used on
| a PPL checkride. And, like Jim said, it's just another
distraction if
| you're fidgeting with it too much.
|

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, said:
>Aviation GPS's need periodic map updates. So what I'd ideally like is
>rather low-end land/marine unit with a basic map (cities, highways,
>shoreline, other topographic features) that has available software to
>create my own waypoint database of airports and navaids to supplement
>the base map.
>
>Anyone using something like that?

Take a look at EasyGPS.com - it will tell you what GPSes will accept a
load of data from a GPX format file. Then you can generate GPX format
files from my web site, http://navaid.com/GPX/ - I update the data on that
site every 28 days from DAFIF data and every 56 days from FAA data.

--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"If something's expensive to develop, and somebody's not going to get paid, it
won't get developed. So you decide: Do you want software to be written, or
not?" - Bill Gates doesn't foresee the FSF or Linux, 1980.

[Jim Macklin]

Well, you do have to have some means to know what you're
seeing with the OUTSIDE WORLD INDICATOR. The chart could be
almost anything, a gas station road map, an encyclopedia,
but if fuel is not critical, you can find New Orleans from
Wichita, by flying a heading of 165, for several hours
[depends on speed] until you reach the endless body of water
[Gulf of Mexico] and turn left and follow the shore line to
the big river [Mississippi] and the turn left again until
you see the city and the big lake, airport on the south
shore.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in
message ...
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:Gd7Of.110864$QW2.58596@dukeread08...
| > Everything except the windows and a chart is just an aid
to
| > navigation.
|
| Take out "chart", and you're exactly correct.
|
|

[Peter Duniho]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:Ve8Of.111157$QW2.108788@dukeread08...
> Well, you do have to have some means to know what you're
> seeing with the OUTSIDE WORLD INDICATOR.

No, you don't. People managed to get from Point A to Point B for tens of
thousands of years before written language was invented, never mind
map-making.

The most basic navigation simply involves a means of locomotion, and the
human ability to navigate without any external aids at all. A chart is no
less an "aid to navigation" than any other device that might assist that
human.

Pete

[Dr. Anthony J. Lomenzo]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
> news:Ve8Of.111157$QW2.108788@dukeread08...
>
>>Well, you do have to have some means to know what you're
>>seeing with the OUTSIDE WORLD INDICATOR.
>
>
> No, you don't. People managed to get from Point A to Point B for tens of
> thousands of years before written language was invented, never mind
> map-making.
>
> The most basic navigation simply involves a means of locomotion, and the
> human ability to navigate without any external aids at all. A chart is no
> less an "aid to navigation" than any other device that might assist that
> human.
>
> Pete
>
>

Peter! It seems I keep running into you! Hey, thanks for the info in the
RAS group ... 'very' helpful indeed!

Anyway, and switching seats, so to speak, for the real McCoy versus
screen versions, what's your take on the Garmin phenomena? I chose
Garmin because that seems to be almost 'de rigueur' now in many CP's as
the proverbial nav 'back-up' but, I say but, various of the brethren
whose flight log books show much PIC time claim that the new technology
is in 'one' sense a great adjunct to the VOR/NDB/RMI/etc. thing 'but'
the trade off for new folks and even some old hands to boot is what is
being touted as the "follow the birdie" syndrome where the moving map
becomes, de facto, the 'primary' means of navigation. In essence, VOR
skills [et al] suffer or get horrendously rusty and the 'follow the
birdie' moving map, should it fail or those battery back-ups not do
their thing, well, the Zola-like J'accuse, so to speak, that is making
the rounds is the PIC would be hurting because nav skills in general
take, or rather have taken, a beating to the moving map.

Now me, I see the moving map technology as an excellent adjunct to
'whatever' nav skills one uses from the map and window thing to the VOR
to, as I said, 'whatever' acquired nav skills , but there does seem to
be a possible 'over-reliance' on the portable or fixed Garmin [et al] in
GA and the trade off of maintaining and indeed 'using' general nav skills.

Comment(s)?

Doc Tony

[Kevin Black]

If you have a PDA, Pocket FMS is as good as the more 'commercial' products
and is under continuous development with an active forum. It's out of
Europe, but I was pleasantly surprised at the quality of base maps and
airspace data for Australia. I just sold my Garmin GPS III Pilot and
replaced with Pocket FMS. The actual cost (to be a donor and get the good
maps) is US$60 BUT this assumes you have a PDA and (bluetooth) GPS. If yea
already have the PDA you can get into a very upmarket colour mapping system
for about $200.

www.pocketfms.com

Cheers,
Kevin

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> If you are looking for something loo cost, consider buying a PDA with a
> CF slot and just running something like PocketFMS (its free). You could
> also buy a $15 copy of MS streets for it for use in the car too.
>
> -Robert
>

[Peter Duniho]

"Dr. Anthony J. Lomenzo" > wrote in message
...
> [...]
> Now me, I see the moving map technology as an excellent adjunct to
> 'whatever' nav skills one uses from the map and window thing to the VOR
> to, as I said, 'whatever' acquired nav skills , but there does seem to be
> a possible 'over-reliance' on the portable or fixed Garmin [et al] in GA
> and the trade off of maintaining and indeed 'using' general nav skills.
>
> Comment(s)?

Welcome to one of the classic arguments in aviation, at least of late.

I hardly ever use GPS, simply because I don't have an aviation one available
to me on a regular basis (I don't have any particular bias against GPS), so
I'm not really one to ask. I have an opinion (as you'll see below), but
little first-hand experience using GPS units with which to back it up.
However, you posted your question in a public forum, and plenty of people
here DO have an opinion. No doubt, you'll hear at least some of them now.
:)

I do think that skills that are not practiced get rusty. That's just how it
is. Many people feel GPS should be avoided for primary training (we just
had a couple of posts on that topic), and others feel it should be avoided
all the time. Personally, I think it's just a tool, and when implemented
correctly, it can be FAR more valuable than other means of navigation,
precisely because of its increased accuracy and ease of interpretation.
After all, every advance in navigation has been with the intent to improve
accuracy, ease of interpretation, or both.

When you write "general nav skill", it's not obvious whether you mean
"conventional navigation instruments", such as VORs or ADFs, or if you mean
the more general issues surrounding navigation (such as cross-checking
multiple information sources, pre-flight planning, monitoring flight
progress, etc.) If the former, I'd say those skills are going to eventually
disappear and no longer be needed. If the latter, I'd say those skills are
ALWAYS going to be important for a pilot, and all that will change is the
various sources of information used to exercise those skills.

We don't fly A-N courses anymore, and NDB approaches are unusual, even
though both require a much better "mental picture" of where you are, due to
the less intuitive presentation of position information to the pilot. Yet,
I don't see anyone arguing that students ought to learn those first before
learning about VOR navigation (a huge step up in intuitive presentation,
IMHO).

In some period of time (10 or 20 years, maybe 30), the VOR will go the way
of the NDB and previous navigation methods, and GPS will be all anyone uses
(or perhaps something even better...who knows). It will still be just as
critical for the pilot to keep a mental picture of where they are, rather
than relying blindly on the navigation instrument, and we will still have
pilots who fail to do so and wind up lost or making some other mistake, just
as we did even before GPS came along.

Over-reliance on ANY single navigation tool is a mistake, whether it's GPS
or VOR or NDB or whatever. But for a pilot who isn't ever going to fly
using anything *except* a GPS, I don't see the point in keeping their VOR
skills fresh (except perhaps as an academic issue), just as a pilot who
isn't ever going to fly an A-N course has no reason to practice those. One
day, and that day will be relatively soon, there will be a significant
number of airplanes in the fleet that don't even have a VOR radio installed.
The number of pilots who can reasonably state that they have no need to
practice VOR navigation is quite small today, but it's non-zero, and the
number will grow.

Generalizations claiming that ALL pilots must continue to stay current with
VOR navigation are already false, and such generalizations will become more
blatantly false as time passes.

Pete

[Cub Driver]

On 3 Mar 2006 09:52:37 -0800, wrote:

>Aviation GPS's need periodic map updates. So what I'd ideally like is
>rather low-end land/marine unit with a basic map (cities, highways,
>shoreline, other topographic features) that has available software to
>create my own waypoint database of airports and navaids to supplement
>the base map.

I used this system for several years: a Garmin III Plus.
www.pipercubforum.com/garmin.htm

I added a "Datachunk" for five bucks and winnowed it down on my
computer, using free EZ GPS software, then uploaded the data and the
obvious routes to the Garmin. It worked very well.

Inevitably I wound up springing $1,700 for a Garmin 296, and I have a
lot of fun with it. But in some ways the earlier lash-up was better.
Go to the url for more.



-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Thomas Borchert]

> Aviation GPS's need periodic map updates.
>

We're talking VFR, right. Most people upgrade their handhelds for VFR
once or twice per year, at 35 $ a pop. Figure out the percentage of
your yearly flying cost - it's negligible.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Robert,

> PocketFMS (its free).
>

Actually, it's donation ware (donate if you like it) - and if no one
does, development will cease at some point.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Stubby,

> the standard instruments.
>

To which I say: and GPS certainly is a standard instrument in the year
2006. We don't fly by flapping our wings, either.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, said:
>> Aviation GPS's need periodic map updates.
>We're talking VFR, right. Most people upgrade their handhelds for VFR
>once or twice per year, at 35 $ a pop. Figure out the percentage of
>your yearly flying cost - it's negligible.

I've had my Garmin 195 for 10 years now and I've updated it once. Never
seen any problems with that - airports don't move that often or that far.

It might be a problem with IFR flying, since airway intersections can move
a few metres between updates.

--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Today Has Been Two Of Those Days.
-- Mike Andrews

[Jim Macklin]

Clearly navigation requires some information. When walking
or drifting with the ocean currents, a map is not needed.
Lewis and Clark made maps as they walked westward.

But today, without a current chart, in the cockpit, you will
violate some type of airspace in short order. Yes, many
things can be left out, you don't NEED a compass if you can
see the sun or moon or the North Star. Maybe you "know" the
river and will follow it [MSP to STL, for example] but
navigation requires the navigator to have information.
Merely blundering around in the air can be done by anyone.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Peter Duniho" > wrote in
message ...
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:Ve8Of.111157$QW2.108788@dukeread08...
| > Well, you do have to have some means to know what you're
| > seeing with the OUTSIDE WORLD INDICATOR.
|
| No, you don't. People managed to get from Point A to
Point B for tens of
| thousands of years before written language was invented,
never mind
| map-making.
|
| The most basic navigation simply involves a means of
locomotion, and the
| human ability to navigate without any external aids at
all. A chart is no
| less an "aid to navigation" than any other device that
might assist that
| human.
|
| Pete
|
|

[Stubby]

Thomas Borchert wrote:
> Stubby,
>
>> the standard instruments.
>>
>
> To which I say: and GPS certainly is a standard instrument in the year
> 2006. We don't fly by flapping our wings, either.
>
Huh???? What plane flies by flapping its wings? This is nonsense.

[Stubby]

Paul Tomblin wrote:
> In a previous article, said:
>> Aviation GPS's need periodic map updates. So what I'd ideally like is
>> rather low-end land/marine unit with a basic map (cities, highways,
>> shoreline, other topographic features) that has available software to
>> create my own waypoint database of airports and navaids to supplement
>> the base map.
>>
>> Anyone using something like that?
>
> Take a look at EasyGPS.com - it will tell you what GPSes will accept a
> load of data from a GPX format file. Then you can generate GPX format
> files from my web site, http://navaid.com/GPX/ - I update the data on that
> site every 28 days from DAFIF data and every 56 days from FAA data.
>
Great site. Thanks, Paul.

[Peter Duniho]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:xlhOf.113449$QW2.22374@dukeread08...
> [...]
> But today, without a current chart, in the cockpit, you will
> violate some type of airspace in short order.

That is simply not true. You cannot claim that it's a foregone conclusion,
since the pilot may have other sources of information that allow him to
avoid "some type of airspace" (including, but not limited to and certainly
not requiring, prior reference to a chart). That assumes there is airspace
nearby to be avoided, which is not true in all cases anyway.

The fact that a chart makes things a lot easier in some cases doesn't mean
the chart is a necessary tool. If anything, it just illustrates the charts
role as "an aid to navigation".

> Yes, many
> things can be left out, you don't NEED a compass if you can
> see the sun or moon or the North Star.

You don't NEED a compass if you can get from Point A to Point B by
referencing ground features or other means. I make many flights during
which I never need to know my compass heading at all, nor the location of
the sun, moon, or any star.

I will agree that charts are very useful. But to say that they are anything
other than "an aid to navigation" is overstating their importance. A human
being is perfectly capable of navigating with nothing more than their own
senses.

Pete

[John Clonts]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message news:xlhOf.113449$QW2.22374@dukeread08...

> see the sun or moon or the North Star. Maybe you "know" the
> river and will follow it [MSP to STL, for example] but
> navigation requires the navigator to have information.

Right, the point was you don't necessarily need a map or chart, to have that "information"...

[Thomas Borchert]

Paul,

> airports don't move that often or that far.
>

Airspace does, especially after 9/11.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Jay Honeck]

> I hardly ever use GPS, simply because I don't have an aviation one available
> to me on a regular basis (I don't have any particular bias against GPS), so
> I'm not really one to ask. I have an opinion (as you'll see below), but
> little first-hand experience using GPS units with which to back it up.
> However, you posted your question in a public forum, and plenty of people
> here DO have an opinion. No doubt, you'll hear at least some of them now.
> :)

Opinions? Here? Ha!

:-)

Personally, I use GPS on every flight. My wife and I (both pilots) fly
often (like, 2 - 3 times per week), and we do a lot of long
cross-country flights. Programming both moving map GPSs is just
another part of our pre-takeoff checklist, as is making sure that
they've both acquired their respective satellites. When I first
started flying, this would have been Buck Rogers stuff -- but after 9
years, it's become just as natural as doing a mag check before takeoff.


Does this make us rusty as far as pilotage goes? Sure. GPS inhibits
your ability to use ded reckoning in much the same way as using a
calculator inhibits your ability to do long division. Can you still do
it? Yep. Is it harder and slower? Yep.

Does that bother me? Not really. There are plenty of things I can't
do as well I used to, simply because technology has made that knowledge
redundant or obsolete. (My voluminous knowledge of Paradox database
design and MS-DOS come to mind.) CAN I still write a batch file?
Sure. Do I need to? Nope.

In my opinion, the safety and situational awareness that GPS gives us
is worth whatever minor downside that may present. To affordably and
easily know my position anywhere on earth to within 10 feet is simply
amazing.

> Over-reliance on ANY single navigation tool is a mistake, whether it's GPS
> or VOR or NDB or whatever. But for a pilot who isn't ever going to fly
> using anything *except* a GPS, I don't see the point in keeping their VOR
> skills fresh (except perhaps as an academic issue)

Using a VOR is simple enough to not really need practice, IMHO. We
turn ours on every few months (usually to listen to an oddball AWOS
that is on a VOR frequency), and spin the knob just to make sure the
needle still centers. If the GPS signal ever fails, we will always
have the VORs on board, if needed.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, said:
>Paul,
>> airports don't move that often or that far.
>>
>
>Airspace does, especially after 9/11.

The GPS is just there to get you on your route - it's up to you to make
sure the route works. If you go on a flight without first marking your
route on a CURRENT sectional or l-chart and then comparing it with the
current TFRs, you deserve to be shot down.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
They thought that faxing one's butt was bad - just wait till they hear
about blurry, pixilated, mpeg artifacted live porn by phone!
-- Geoff Lane contemplates the 3G future

[Jim Macklin]

I do if I'm going to someplace that I have never been to
before and only know by name. The chart IS that
information.



"John Clonts" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message news:xlhOf.113449$QW2.22374@dukeread08...
|
| > see the sun or moon or the North Star. Maybe you "know"
the
| > river and will follow it [MSP to STL, for example] but
| > navigation requires the navigator to have information.
|
| Right, the point was you don't necessarily need a map or
chart, to have that "information"...
|
|

[Peter Duniho]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:B5rOf.115811$QW2.94652@dukeread08...
>I do if I'm going to someplace that I have never been to
> before and only know by name. The chart IS that
> information.

The chart is a *means* to obtain that information. It is not that
information itself, nor is it the only means of obtaining that information,
nor was your original statement restricted only to navigating to unknown
destinations.

Try again?

[Peter Duniho]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
>>Airspace does, especially after 9/11.
>
> The GPS is just there to get you on your route - it's up to you to make
> sure the route works. If you go on a flight without first marking your
> route on a CURRENT sectional or l-chart and then comparing it with the
> current TFRs, you deserve to be shot down.

A proper GPS would have all that information in its database.

GPS technology, especially on the receiver end, is still in its nascency.
Eventually, the GPS will have just as reliable a database as a printed
chart, because it will be updated in real-time, and the database copied to
the GPS will be the same one used to print the charts.

I agree that today, especially for non-IFR-certified GPSs, the GPS is
missing a fair amount of extremely important information. But it doesn't
have to be that way, and if it stays that way for any significant period of
time, we're just a bunch of idiots (who deserve to be shot down).

Pete

[Jim Macklin]

Semantics, I'm done with the thread. Pilots need to look
out the window, it is nice if they know what to look for on
the ground.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Peter Duniho" > wrote in
message ...
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:B5rOf.115811$QW2.94652@dukeread08...
| >I do if I'm going to someplace that I have never been to
| > before and only know by name. The chart IS that
| > information.
|
| The chart is a *means* to obtain that information. It is
not that
| information itself, nor is it the only means of obtaining
that information,
| nor was your original statement restricted only to
navigating to unknown
| destinations.
|
| Try again?
|
|

[Cub Driver]

On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 14:05:02 +0000 (UTC),
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

>I've had my Garmin 195 for 10 years now and I've updated it once. Never
>seen any problems with that - airports don't move that often or that far.

I'm relieved to hear it. I've never updated my 296. I let the free one
slip by because I thought USB II was different somehow from the USB
port on my puter, and I've never felt inclined to pay for an update.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, usenet AT danford DOT net said:
>On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 14:05:02 +0000 (UTC),
>(Paul Tomblin) wrote:
>>I've had my Garmin 195 for 10 years now and I've updated it once. Never
>>seen any problems with that - airports don't move that often or that far.
>
>I'm relieved to hear it. I've never updated my 296. I let the free one
>slip by because I thought USB II was different somehow from the USB
>port on my puter, and I've never felt inclined to pay for an update.

One caveat: before I updated, my GPS was old enough that I had to look up
the old ids for some airports which changed to ICAO identifiers when they
started reporting METAR. So I'd flight plan to KOGS, but put N00 into the
GPS.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Things should be as simple as possible, but not simpler.
-- Albert Einstein

[Grumman-581]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> If you are looking for something loo cost, consider buying a PDA with a
> CF slot and just running something like PocketFMS (its free). You could
> also buy a $15 copy of MS streets for it for use in the car too.

I just picked up a Navman PiN 100 from Fry's for $190... Added a 2G SD
card for $70 (which will have a $20 rebate)... It comes with a GPS and
an automotive type moving map... I downloaded PocketFMS for it also...
So, for $240, I get a GPS with an aviation and road moving map in
addition to a MP3/WMA player that can hold plenty of songs dependent
upon how much I fill it up with the various maps... The only complaint
that I have is that the headphone connector is the 2.5mm plug like the
cell phone headsets instead of the 3.5mm plugs like normal audio
headsets... I haven't had a chance to try it out in my plane yet
though...

[[email protected]]

Hi all; I'm replying to my own post that started this thread because
there were too many good posts to reply to all of them.

In case anyone cares, I got a Magellan SporTrak Map and uploaded the
nearest 200 public use airports and VOR's to my home as user waypoints
using EasyGPS. (When the time comes, I could choose up to the 500 most
useful waypoints for any particular trip.)

The unit is currently only $105 at PlanetGPS. It's definitely on the
cutting edge of obsolecense, but its basemap corresponds surprizingly
well to the way the features look from 3,000 feet.

It also works well in one hand -- fits comfortably with buttons that
are easy to use. That's why I didn't do the PDA route -- I don't want
to have to land after dropping three styluses on the floor.

Thanks for the helpful suggestions and thoughtful discussion.

[150flivver]

If all you do is fly in the local area, not regularly updating the
database is probably no big deal. If you go cross country however,
you'd be unpleasantly surprised by the number of identifiers that
change over time. With TFRs and such, it could get you into a nasty
situation.

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "150flivver" > said:
>If all you do is fly in the local area, not regularly updating the
>database is probably no big deal. If you go cross country however,
>you'd be unpleasantly surprised by the number of identifiers that
>change over time. With TFRs and such, it could get you into a nasty
>situation.

Not a big deal if you always check your flight plan against current charts
and NOTAMs.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
The WWW is exciting because Microsoft doesn't own it, and therefore,
there's a tremendous amount of innovation happening.
-- Steve Jobs

[Grumman-581]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> If you are looking for something loo cost, consider buying a PDA with a
> CF slot and just running something like PocketFMS (its free). You could
> also buy a $15 copy of MS streets for it for use in the car too.

Finally got a chance to use the Navman PiN 100 today in flight with
PocketFMS... Works great... Visible during daylight -- unlike my laptop...
With the 2G memory card, I was able to put all the aviation and road maps on
the machine... Unfortunately, the road map software loads extremely slowly
when you have that much configured on the machine... Not sure if it is
better than the aviation GPS units, but it's good enough that I won't be
taking my laptop on every flight with me from now on...