Terrain-Aware Handheld vs. IFR GPS?

[C Kingsbury]

OK, here's a new take on an old debate:

I fly a 172 with 2 good NAV/COMs, an M1 Loran and a flaky ADF in the
Northeast US. Since everything up here is airways and most of the fields I
go to have an ILS or LOC approach, this is enough to get away with on most
of the flights I take. This is the plane I got my ticket in so I'm used to
it.

I've been thinking about trying to talk my partners into floating the 6k or
so to install a basic IFR-certified GPS like a GX-50 or similar. No, we
cannot afford a GNS-430/480 so that is not part of the decision matrix.

Lately, I've been wondering whether the *real* value of something like the
newer handheld GPSs with terrain alerting (i.e. Garmin 296) might actually
be greater. I know it's not certified, but the certified GPS will do nothing
to warn me that I'm rapidly approaching cumulogranite for whatever reason.

Let's say I cannot get both the handheld and the panel-mount: What would you
choose?

-cwk.

[Jon Woellhaf]

I chose the Garmin 296. I found the terrain data very useful.

Jon

"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message
link.net...
> OK, here's a new take on an old debate:
>
> I fly a 172 with 2 good NAV/COMs, an M1 Loran and a flaky ADF in the
> Northeast US. Since everything up here is airways and most of the fields I
> go to have an ILS or LOC approach, this is enough to get away with on most
> of the flights I take. This is the plane I got my ticket in so I'm used to
> it.
>
> I've been thinking about trying to talk my partners into floating the 6k
or
> so to install a basic IFR-certified GPS like a GX-50 or similar. No, we
> cannot afford a GNS-430/480 so that is not part of the decision matrix.
>
> Lately, I've been wondering whether the *real* value of something like the
> newer handheld GPSs with terrain alerting (i.e. Garmin 296) might actually
> be greater. I know it's not certified, but the certified GPS will do
nothing
> to warn me that I'm rapidly approaching cumulogranite for whatever reason.
>
> Let's say I cannot get both the handheld and the panel-mount: What would
you
> choose?
>
> -cwk.
>
>

[Kobra]

> Lately, I've been wondering whether the *real* value of something like the
> newer handheld GPSs with terrain alerting (i.e. Garmin 296) might actually
> be greater.>

The 296 is small, light, has a big screen, is easy to use, is fast to update
the screen, has 256 colors, has sectional shading, has terrain warnings, has
a glass panel and has voice turn by turn directions for your car. (once you
get to your destination, pull it off the yoke and put it on the dash and now
you'll know where the hotel is and all the great restaurants)

Also the 296 includes a "Nearest Weather Station" and "Nearest FSS" tab if
you press the "Nearest" button. It's handy if you are landing at an ap with
no weather reporting. Also it is good for enroute updates on the weather.
Further, the 296 has a built in weight and balance calculator that can be
customized for any plane. In a matter of three seconds you can have the
weight and balance and never pick up a pencil.

All the IFR approaches are in the database, but on the negative side they
start at the FAF and not at an IAF. They don't give any altitude
information and the missed approach proceedure is not on there.

All-in-all, dollar-for-dollar that's a lot of bang for the buck and a whole
lot of function for 1,695.00.

Gene Wentzel, DC
'71 177RG


"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message
link.net...
> OK, here's a new take on an old debate:
>
> I fly a 172 with 2 good NAV/COMs, an M1 Loran and a flaky ADF in the
> Northeast US. Since everything up here is airways and most of the fields I
> go to have an ILS or LOC approach, this is enough to get away with on most
> of the flights I take. This is the plane I got my ticket in so I'm used to
> it.
>
> I've been thinking about trying to talk my partners into floating the 6k
> or
> so to install a basic IFR-certified GPS like a GX-50 or similar. No, we
> cannot afford a GNS-430/480 so that is not part of the decision matrix.
>
> Lately, I've been wondering whether the *real* value of something like the
> newer handheld GPSs with terrain alerting (i.e. Garmin 296) might actually
> be greater. I know it's not certified, but the certified GPS will do
> nothing
> to warn me that I'm rapidly approaching cumulogranite for whatever reason.
>
> Let's say I cannot get both the handheld and the panel-mount: What would
> you
> choose?
>
> -cwk.
>
>

[Tien Dao]

It depends, I think, entirely on whether you will be doing GPS approaches or
not. If yes, then IFR panel certified, otherwise the Garmin 296. I have
the 296. It is great for situational awareness and has much improved battery
life over the 295. That said, I still have an extra battery for the 296 and
my Lowrance 100 if that fails.

Tien

"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message
link.net...
> OK, here's a new take on an old debate:
>
> I fly a 172 with 2 good NAV/COMs, an M1 Loran and a flaky ADF in the
> Northeast US. Since everything up here is airways and most of the fields I
> go to have an ILS or LOC approach, this is enough to get away with on most
> of the flights I take. This is the plane I got my ticket in so I'm used to
> it.
>
> I've been thinking about trying to talk my partners into floating the 6k
or
> so to install a basic IFR-certified GPS like a GX-50 or similar. No, we
> cannot afford a GNS-430/480 so that is not part of the decision matrix.
>
> Lately, I've been wondering whether the *real* value of something like the
> newer handheld GPSs with terrain alerting (i.e. Garmin 296) might actually
> be greater. I know it's not certified, but the certified GPS will do
nothing
> to warn me that I'm rapidly approaching cumulogranite for whatever reason.
>
> Let's say I cannot get both the handheld and the panel-mount: What would
you
> choose?
>
> -cwk.
>
>

[Newps]

Tien Dao wrote:

> It depends, I think, entirely on whether you will be doing GPS approaches or
> not.

Not only GPS approaches but any approach where knowing a distance helps.
Such as a VOR approach that gives a distance to the missed, such as
the VOR-A at KBIL. Now you don't have to time or worry about your
groundspeed.

[Michael]

"C Kingsbury" > wrote
> Lately, I've been wondering whether the *real* value of something like the
> newer handheld GPSs with terrain alerting (i.e. Garmin 296) might actually
> be greater. I know it's not certified, but the certified GPS will do nothing
> to warn me that I'm rapidly approaching cumulogranite for whatever reason.
>
> Let's say I cannot get both the handheld and the panel-mount: What would you
> choose?

Well, let's look at it another way. Since you don't really need to
fly GPS approaches and direct routings are not generally possible in
your neck of the woods, the only real benefit of IFR certified GPS is
the supposed increased safety of an IFR-approved installation.
Against that, you have the increased safety of terrain info.

Hmm, let's see, terrain info or blessing by government bureaucrats...

Doesn't sound like much of a a choice at all.

Michael

[L. R. Diu Broff]

"C Kingsbury" > wrote in
link.net:

> I've been thinking about trying to talk my partners into floating the
> 6k or so to install a basic IFR-certified GPS like a GX-50 or similar.
> No, we cannot afford a GNS-430/480 so that is not part of the decision
> matrix.

I have GX-60 (GX-50 with the addition of built-in COMM transceiver). I'm
pleased with it, WHEN IT WORKS. This is GX-60 no. 5 in the same
airplane. We went through four of them during initial installation
before finding one that worked properly (the first three had to be
returned to the manufacturer by the installing shop, Montgomery Aviation,
Montgomery AL, due to quality control problems). One had severe
interference problems, one was DOA, and one had a flaky display. The
fourth one worked well for years, until someone broke into the airplane
and cleaned out all radios except the Bendix T-12D ADF. The insurance
replacement worked for a few months, then the display went intermittent.
Back to the factory (they sent a loaner) for repair, get it back,
installed, and found that they had fixed the intermittent problem on the
display. The display was now totally dead. Back to the factory again
(keeping their loaner unit, which their accounting department started
sending out bills for, since it had not been returned), and finally got
them to admit that the problem really existed. They put in a re-furbed
display subassembly. Back in the airplane again, and it has been working
fine for about half a year.

Warning against GX-50, GX-55, GX-60, GX-65 series: The tech at II
Morrow/Apollo/UPSAT/GarminAT (what is their name this week?) told me that
as of the end of last year (2003) these are no longer being manufactured
due to problems in the supply chain with, guess what, the display
subassembly.

If I were doing it again today and wanted to keep the budget under
control, I would probably go for a KN-89B or KN-90B. Not a lot of bells
and whistles, but they're available very inexpensively on the re-furbed
market, and repair parts can always be found for King stuff (I'm not a
huge King fan, but it is a practical, low-cost solution to IFR approach
GPS).

[Doug]

Panel mount stuff is usually better. Turns on with the radios, turns
off with radios, no batteries or cords. Don't need to "get it out".
The buttons are built to work with it panel mounted. Probably some
other reasons. I have a handheld, and use it some, but its mostly for
backup if my panel GPS goes on the fritz. Once you use a good panel
mount, you'll never want to go back.

"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message . net>...
> OK, here's a new take on an old debate:
>
> I fly a 172 with 2 good NAV/COMs, an M1 Loran and a flaky ADF in the
> Northeast US. Since everything up here is airways and most of the fields I
> go to have an ILS or LOC approach, this is enough to get away with on most
> of the flights I take. This is the plane I got my ticket in so I'm used to
> it.
>
> I've been thinking about trying to talk my partners into floating the 6k or
> so to install a basic IFR-certified GPS like a GX-50 or similar. No, we
> cannot afford a GNS-430/480 so that is not part of the decision matrix.
>
> Lately, I've been wondering whether the *real* value of something like the
> newer handheld GPSs with terrain alerting (i.e. Garmin 296) might actually
> be greater. I know it's not certified, but the certified GPS will do nothing
> to warn me that I'm rapidly approaching cumulogranite for whatever reason.
>
> Let's say I cannot get both the handheld and the panel-mount: What would you
> choose?
>
> -cwk.