This is my understanding too. In order for the box to drive the glideslope
needle, the altitudes have to be in the database. Currently I don't think
that they are..

Mike
MU-2


"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...
Richard Kaplan wrote:

"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...
Speaking only for myself, its pretty damm confusing exactly what would
be
done with WAAS even if implemented. Garmins' other units that accept

WAAS is now implemented and IFR approved as of the past week.

If a receiver were approved for WAAS approaches, then TODAY you could
use
VNAV/LNAV miniums on GPS RNAV approaches instead of LNAV minimums.
Presumably (though I am not certain) a VNAV/LNAV GPS RNAV approach would
be
considered a precision approach. UPSAT's CNX80 web page touts the
airports
you have access to today with WAAS; yet the version of the POH
supplement
posted on their site says in the legal fineprint that precision
approaches
are NOT permitted. So I am not certain if you can or cannot fly
VNAV/LNAV
GPS approach mininums TODAY on a CNX-80.

What I would like to see from Garmin is a controlled descent option
on non-precision GPS approaches, which would be perfectly legal to
implement right now (because it is inside the "dive and drive"

If you want to do this as a backup to other navigation, you can do this
now
with the VNAV function on the Garmin 430/530, albeit not yet with WAAS.

I was talking about driving the glideslope needle. Pretty much by
definition,
WAAS is going to have to drive the needle to be a precision device. On my
430,
the glideslope needle is driven (obviously) by the box, and when Garmin
talks
about "WAAS compatibility" I have to presume that it means ability to
drive
the glideslope from the GPS side. What else would it mean ? We can add
boxes
to make WAAS work ? Anybody could say that.

--
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.....