![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
ADF and DME are not dead. Lose GPS enroute IFR and what else do you have?
I have used regularly in my flying a CNX remoted to an MX-20. SL30 is second Nav/Com. Two VOR`s with separate glide slopes. DME remotes to SL30. RMI presents information from ADF on double needle and Nav1, Nav2, or GPS to single needle. So guess what happens? In turbulence I knock off the only knob on the CNX that selects radio frequencies. The shaft that the knob fits over is bent and will not turn. That is with how much force I hit the panel with my hand. The airplane immediately loses Nav1, Com1, and GPS. Garmin says that this has never happened before. I am left on a multileg flightplan with VOR, DME and ADF. I have a handheld Garmin GPS 196 but you may have difficulty programming it when aircraft control takes all your attention. I could not use the hand held GPS at that time. I flew an ILS approach with DME and ADF assistance. No emergency. No question of outcome. The dilemma of these boxes is that while they save tremendous panel space, you give up redundancy. I am not proCNX80 and antiGNS430. They are simply 2 different boxes with 2 different missions and 2 different learning curves. And we keep getting another curve to learn with the CNX as Garmin continually modifies and improves and changes and fixes the software. When they do this, the menus change. They nested menus. This means you have to unlearn and relearn how the unit operates. One of my friends always laughs and says " When you live on the cutting edge, you sure bleed a lot". I would choose the CNX based on your type of flying and not because it is the hot new box and somebody else has one. It has a very steep learning curve(expensive). But if you fly serious IFR and you are familiar with FMS`s, it must be considered. I think the unspoken concern I share is that this is getting way too complicated for casual use. And is this technology going to get any easier or intuitive in operation in the future? I also believe that when a company sells ANY new technology unit that training must be made available from that company. How many of us really use the navigational potential of any of our equipment? If you can afford the box and risk the safety of your flight on the outcome of the use of the box, you can afford the training. Flying has never been cheap and it is not getting any cheaper tomorrow. "Hankal" wrote in message ... Just looked at my approach plates. Very few have NDB approaches, some are VOR DME, some require ADF. More and more now are GPS. Since I can use the GPS instead of DME for Some VOR approaches, is it not wise (prudent) to get an IFR certified GPS now? Should it be a Garmin 430 or a 480? The cost of the 480 is about 2 grand more, but I could use it for ILS approaches. My ADF is useless and I am contemplating a GPS in the place on the panel. I have never flown a GPS approach. My finances are low, but my life does have a high value. So says the MRS. You can email or put your thoughts and suggestion here. Hank 172 driver |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|