Garmin 530 WAAS upgrade - what's involved?

[Paul Tomblin]

We recently put a 530 in one of our planes. Garmin says the upgrade to
WAAS is only going to be $1500. Sure, that's what they charge for the
guts, but what is this likely to run to once the shop starts adding their
labour costs, etc. Is another field approval needed, or what sort of
paper work?

--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
Sign on door of computing lecturer: "If your project is 90% right,
I have to give you a distinction, your employer will fire you."
-- Zebee

[Mike Adams[_2_]]

(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

> We recently put a 530 in one of our planes. Garmin says the upgrade to
> WAAS is only going to be $1500. Sure, that's what they charge for the
> guts, but what is this likely to run to once the shop starts adding their
> labour costs, etc. Is another field approval needed, or what sort of
> paper work?

Paul,

I saw a discussion about this on another forum. Other issues are that the antenna may need to be
replaced, as well as possibly the antenna cable to RG-400. The upgrade is covered by an STC with an
approved model list, so good chance no field approval will be required, but a 337 will be required for the
STC installation.

Mike

[John R. Copeland]

"Mike Adams" > wrote in message ...
> (Paul Tomblin) wrote:
>
>> We recently put a 530 in one of our planes. Garmin says the upgrade to
>> WAAS is only going to be $1500. Sure, that's what they charge for the
>> guts, but what is this likely to run to once the shop starts adding their
>> labour costs, etc. Is another field approval needed, or what sort of
>> paper work?
>
> Paul,
>
> I saw a discussion about this on another forum. Other issues are that the antenna may need to be
> replaced, as well as possibly the antenna cable to RG-400. The upgrade is covered by an STC with an
> approved model list, so good chance no field approval will be required, but a 337 will be required for the
> STC installation.
>
> Mike

Antenna replaced? If it's broken, maybe.
Nothing in the upgrade itself would require that.
And if the cable works OK before the upgrade, it'll work OK afterward.

[karl gruber[_1_]]

"John R. Copeland" > wrote in message
. ..

Antenna replaced? If it's broken, maybe.
Nothing in the upgrade itself would require that.
And if the cable works OK before the upgrade, it'll work OK afterward.

.................................................. .................................................. ............................

The antenna WILL need to be replaced.

Karl
ATP CFI
"Curator" N185KG

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

> The antenna WILL need to be replaced.

That is consistent with my readings of the ComAnt antenna web site.
The WAAS GPS seem to require 26dB antennas, whereas plain ones make do
with 17dB ones.

- FChE

[Ron Natalie]

John R. Copeland wrote:
> Antenna replaced? If it's broken, maybe.
> Nothing in the upgrade itself would require that.
> And if the cable works OK before the upgrade, it'll work OK afterward.
>
While the WAAS satellites use the same (L1) frequencies as the
others..rumor has it that the existing antennas Garmin sold with
the 530/430 have a hard time seeing low enough on the horizon to
meet the C146a specs.

[Ron Lee]

Ron Natalie > wrote:

>John R. Copeland wrote:
>> Antenna replaced? If it's broken, maybe.
>> Nothing in the upgrade itself would require that.
>> And if the cable works OK before the upgrade, it'll work OK afterward.
>>
>While the WAAS satellites use the same (L1) frequencies as the
>others..rumor has it that the existing antennas Garmin sold with
>the 530/430 have a hard time seeing low enough on the horizon to
>meet the C146a specs.

I find that hard to believe. Do you know the elevation angle
requirement? I will check how low it picks up soon.

Ron Lee

[Stan Prevost]

"Frank Ch. Eigler" > wrote in message
...
>
>> The antenna WILL need to be replaced.
>
> That is consistent with my readings of the ComAnt antenna web site.
> The WAAS GPS seem to require 26dB antennas, whereas plain ones make do
> with 17dB ones.
>
> - FChE

Horizon-to-horizon coverage, with 17dB gain???? And increasing their gain
will just narrow the coverage. Unless the gain figure includes some
low-noise active gain in the antenna package, ahead of the cable losses.

But I have also heard from two different shops that the antennas will have
to be replaced. Haven't heard why.

[Judah]

"Stan Prevost" > wrote in news:12mcgail9ohknd8
@corp.supernews.com:

> But I have also heard from two different shops that the antennas will have
> to be replaced. Haven't heard why.

I believe it has something to do with sheep's wool and Old Navy.

[[email protected][_1_]]

Stan Prevost wrote:
> "Frank Ch. Eigler" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> The antenna WILL need to be replaced.
> >
> > That is consistent with my readings of the ComAnt antenna web site.
> > The WAAS GPS seem to require 26dB antennas, whereas plain ones make do
> > with 17dB ones.
> >
> > - FChE
>
> Horizon-to-horizon coverage, with 17dB gain???? And increasing their gain
> will just narrow the coverage. Unless the gain figure includes some
> low-noise active gain in the antenna package, ahead of the cable losses.

*** All of these antennas have amplifiers built in. They are powered
by DC on
the coax.

- Jerry Kaidor



>
> But I have also heard from two different shops that the antennas will have
> to be replaced. Haven't heard why.

[Glasair]

It's true. I was at the AOPA convention at Palm Springs and talked
with the Garmin rep. The antenna is replaced to upgrade to WAAS and
included in the $1500 price. I have a homebuilt Glasair so replacing
the antenna won't be any problem or added shop expense since I do it
myself. Of course it will be convenient if it has the same footprint
as the old one.
When the first announced their much delayed WAAS upgrade program, you
had to pre-sign-up with a shop to get the $1500 price. But now it
seems they are just giving it to everyone.
Ron Lee wrote:
> Ron Natalie > wrote:
>
> >John R. Copeland wrote:
> >> Antenna replaced? If it's broken, maybe.
> >> Nothing in the upgrade itself would require that.
> >> And if the cable works OK before the upgrade, it'll work OK afterward.
> >>
> >While the WAAS satellites use the same (L1) frequencies as the
> >others..rumor has it that the existing antennas Garmin sold with
> >the 530/430 have a hard time seeing low enough on the horizon to
> >meet the C146a specs.
>
> I find that hard to believe. Do you know the elevation angle
> requirement? I will check how low it picks up soon.
>
> Ron Lee

[Ron Lee]

"Glasair" > wrote:

>When the first announced their much delayed WAAS upgrade program, you
>had to pre-sign-up with a shop to get the $1500 price. But now it
>seems they are just giving it to everyone.

I called Garmin about this last week and that was what I was told.

Ron Lee

[Roy N5804F]

What did Garmin tell you Ron ?

Roy

"Ron Lee" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Glasair" > wrote:
>
>>When the first announced their much delayed WAAS upgrade program, you
>>had to pre-sign-up with a shop to get the $1500 price. But now it
>>seems they are just giving it to everyone.
>
> I called Garmin about this last week and that was what I was told.
>
> Ron Lee
>

[Ron Natalie]

Glasair wrote:
> It's true. I was at the AOPA convention at Palm Springs and talked
> with the Garmin rep.

Garmin is still offering the 1500 price I believe. The list price of
the -W version of the units by the way is exactly $1500 higher than
the non-W version as well.

[Jon]

Ron Lee wrote:
> Ron Natalie > wrote:
>
> >John R. Copeland wrote:
> >> Antenna replaced? If it's broken, maybe.
> >> Nothing in the upgrade itself would require that.
> >> And if the cable works OK before the upgrade, it'll work OK afterward.
> >>
> >While the WAAS satellites use the same (L1) frequencies as the
> >others..rumor has it that the existing antennas Garmin sold with
> >the 530/430 have a hard time seeing low enough on the horizon to
> >meet the C146a specs.
>
> I find that hard to believe. Do you know the elevation angle
> requirement? I will check how low it picks up soon.

Ron,

As you know, the MOPS has gone through several revs, but my copy of
DO-229A specifies 10.-deg. They've released 229D and I believe it
hadn't changed between C and D, but the mask angle is now 5.-deg.

As an aside, remember the issues with some of the early 129 boxes? As I
recall, there was no specific requirement for any particular mask
angle. 7.5-deg (then 5.0-deg in a later version) was the recommended
value. Basically, as long as the rcvr. manuf. could prove that
Integrity was being maintained, it didn't really matter what mask angle
was chosen...

But it did/does. Effects such as local multipath come into play at the
low angles.

When examining the Availbility/Integrity tradespace, those on the
conservative side would rather take the Availability hit in order to
maintain Integrity. Conservative in this context meaning 'safe' as
opposed to Right Wing ;)

> Ron Lee

Regards,
Jon

[Ron Lee]

"Roy N5804F" > wrote:

>
>What did Garmin tell you Ron ?
>
>Roy

That the $1500 price is independent of having to be registered for the
upgrade last year. If you registered....$1500. If you did not....
$1500

Ron Lee

[Peter R.]

Ron Lee > wrote:

> That the $1500 price is independent of having to be registered for the
> upgrade last year. If you registered....$1500. If you did not....
> $1500

Maybe those of us who registered will get a free coffee mug or something.

--
Peter

[Peter R.]

Frank Stutzman > wrote:

> Indeed. Garmin has had my $1,500 for, what?, two years? Nice of me to give them
> an intrest free loan. The least they could do is give me some $.99 marketing
> gimcrack.

You actually paid when you registered for the upgrade? That was not a
requirement to register.

--
Peter

[Jim Carter[_1_]]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Stutzman ]
> Posted At: Thursday, November 30, 2006 10:08 PM
> Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr
> Conversation: Garmin 530 WAAS upgrade - what's involved?
> Subject: Re: Garmin 530 WAAS upgrade - what's involved?
>
....
> Indeed. Garmin has had my $1,500 for, what?, two years? Nice of me
to
> give them
> an intrest free loan. The least they could do is give me some $.99
> marketing
> gimcrack.
>
> --
> Frank Stutzman
> Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
> Hood River, OR

What will you bet that you have to pay $7.95 postage and handling?

[Frank Stutzman]

Peter R. > wrote:
> Ron Lee > wrote:
>
>> That the $1500 price is independent of having to be registered for the
>> upgrade last year. If you registered....$1500. If you did not....
>> $1500
>
> Maybe those of us who registered will get a free coffee mug or something.

Indeed. Garmin has had my $1,500 for, what?, two years? Nice of me to give them
an intrest free loan. The least they could do is give me some $.99 marketing
gimcrack.

--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Hood River, OR

[Jay Beckman]

"Frank Stutzman" > wrote in message
...
> Peter R. > wrote:
>> Frank Stutzman > wrote:
>>
>>> Indeed. Garmin has had my $1,500 for, what?, two years? Nice of me to
>>> give them
>>> an intrest free loan. The least they could do is give me some $.99
>>> marketing
>>> gimcrack.
>>
>> You actually paid when you registered for the upgrade? That was not a
>> requirement to register.
>
> Ok, fine! Go and ruin a perfectly good rant!
>
> Ah, er, you are right. I gave my avionics shop a $100 deposit on the
> upgrade.
> Garmin never saw any my money.
>
> See? It was so long ago I've forgotten how much money I've given to whom!
> ;-)
>
> --
> Frank Stutzman
> Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
> Hood River, OR

Frank,

Got that $50 I lent you...??

<g d r>

Jay B

[Frank Stutzman]

Peter R. > wrote:
> Frank Stutzman > wrote:
>
>> Indeed. Garmin has had my $1,500 for, what?, two years? Nice of me to give them
>> an intrest free loan. The least they could do is give me some $.99 marketing
>> gimcrack.
>
> You actually paid when you registered for the upgrade? That was not a
> requirement to register.

Ok, fine! Go and ruin a perfectly good rant!

Ah, er, you are right. I gave my avionics shop a $100 deposit on the upgrade.
Garmin never saw any my money.

See? It was so long ago I've forgotten how much money I've given to whom! ;-)

--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Hood River, OR

[Peter R.]

Frank Stutzman > wrote:

> Ok, fine! Go and ruin a perfectly good rant!

Sorry, Frank. I sometimes stand up after the magician does a trick and try
to explain how it must have been done. :)

Not really.

--
Peter

[scott moore]

Peter R. wrote:
> Ron Lee > wrote:
>
>> That the $1500 price is independent of having to be registered for the
>> upgrade last year. If you registered....$1500. If you did not....
>> $1500
>
> Maybe those of us who registered will get a free coffee mug or something.
>

I got a song and a promise.

Ok, lying about the song...

Scott

[Peter R.]

scott moore > wrote:

> Peter R. wrote:
>> Ron Lee > wrote:
>>
>>> That the $1500 price is independent of having to be registered for the
>>> upgrade last year. If you registered....$1500. If you did not....
>>> $1500
>>
>> Maybe those of us who registered will get a free coffee mug or something.
>>
>
> I got a song and a promise.
>
> Ok, lying about the song...

And, when you look back at it the promise wasn't very reliable, either.

--
Peter