In article 1120946772.bdcbdac7353f6e551facbb6a46d64e8a@teran ews,
"Richard Kaplan" wrote:
For a portable weather system--no question about it. However, if you're
an aircraft owner and never move the weather system, it's a moot point.

Less significant, yes. Moot, no. It is still a piece of equipment which
needs either a quasi-permanent power connection to ship's power or else
regular recharging or replacing of batteries.

How is this any different than the Garmin 396? As far as I see it, it
isn't much different from the pilot's perspective. It's fairly painless
to practice some basic cable management and power becomes a non-issue.


It is relevant to renter pilots in particular because it is by far the
easiest way to put both GPS navigation and weather in a rental airplane.
Sure you can set up an XM receiver, Bluetooth GPS, and PDA whenever you rent
a plane, but that is a lot more work then plugging in a 396.

I'm not disputing that, but in this section, I was responding to your
comments regarding integration with the 430/530. I doubt that many
airplanes in the rental fleet will have the interface available for that
type of integration.



Yes it is if you are talking about an IFR situation when you need to enter
flight plan or navaid info into panel-mount IFR equipment and then duplicate
it in a portable GPS and then reprogram both when you receive changes in
routings or approach clearances enroute. For VFR flight this is not a huge
issue; for IFR flight the convenience from the crossfed data is HUGE.

In my experience, entering a flight plan in a PDA or TabletPC is easier
than with the Garmin units. I have over 20 hours of IFR flight on the
PDA system, and I've had to change flight plans, but it's no big deal
because I have a keyboard at my fingertips. Would it be nice to do it
once a push a button, sure, but I doubt that most users of the 396 will
interface it with a 430/530.



and I probably wouldn't hesitate to use the Tablet or
PDA for primary enroute navigation if I had a panel mount that wasn't
doing anything other than navigation anyway.

That is fine for VFR but not IFR.

Not sure why it isn't fine for IFR. It's perfectly safe and it's legal
enroute if you are in a radar environment.



Yes, I am referring to the "Vertical Speed to Target" feature of the Garmin
portables (and some Lowrance units as well). This is a highly desirable
feature for executing a deadstick landing when VFR or especially IFR or at
night.

Not sure how this works exactly, but there are software packages that
offer similar types of emergency glide features for other systems.


renter pilot, the 396 would be an ideal system due to its easy
portability. If I was an owner serious about certified weather uplink
and features not available on the 430/530, I think I'd investigate
selling the 430/530 and buying another certified system that can better
serve my needs.

There is no such thing as certified weather uplink -- it is easier panel or
portable.

I was referring to weather uplink to a certified panel-mount GPS.



That is one of the key points... the terrain feature of the 296 is
stupendous and ought to be considered the Product of the Year -- in many
ways its terrain implementation is superior to that on much more expensive
panel solutions such as an MX20 or an EX500.


Maybe, but I still contend that the landscape display orientation of the
296/396 and some units before them is less-than-ideal. The display
resolution itself really isn't that nice either. Other software vendors
have better terrain features, but I guess some folks just like to see
"Garmin" on their navigation equipment.


I'm not arguing that the 396 is a bad unit; quite to the contrary, it
looks like a great unit. I just don't think that it is going to "kill
off" all of the PDA/TabletPC competitors like some folks seem to
suggest. For example, WxWorx appeals to a wide audience and provides
capability that the 396 can't match, as does Control Vision's product.
There are plenty of others out there who may find their systems a hard
sell over the 396, though.



JKG