Garmin 496 compared to the 396

I also use the zoom-out, pan, zoom-in technique and that works much better than
trying to scroll over long distances while zoomed in.

How do you get around the problem of detail disappearing when you zoom
out?

Example: Flying to Michigan, we wanted to see what the weather was
like in Joliet, IL -- an area of questionable weather.

If you zoom out so that you don't have to "slew" (or scroll), Joliet
disappears. You then have to put your cursor where you *think* Joliet
is, and hit the "zoom in" button to see it again.

If you set detail levels to so that Joliet doesn't disappear at that
zoom level, you can't see it, cuz it's buried in too many airports.

Worse, not all airports are weather reporting stations -- and those
cute little triangles (that indicate XM weather reporting) also
disappear when you zoom out. Now, you're stuck selecting an area and
zooming in on it, hoping that there will be a reporting station there
-- wherever "there" is.

The only solution we've found is to slew around, and put up with the
slow refresh rate.

Ultimately, the solution will come when Garmin (or Lowrance)
incorporates weather into a larger display that can display everything
in a readable format at a usable zoom level.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

I have to admit, I'm still in the honeymoon phase with my 'old' 396 with
autokit. But isn't it great that we're fussing about the need to
zooming out and guessing where a weather reporting station before
zooming in to get the weather? All overlaid on a combined Nexrad and
cloud cover image. I mean, doesn't it all beat calling Fligh****ch and
trying to jot down some facts while hand flying in some choppy soup?

I gotta get an autopilot so I can more fully enjoy playing with this
thing while motoring along. "Honey, would you prefer the 60s or 70s
music channel now? The US Open broadcast just ended, I'm sorry you
missed listening to Phil self destruct but I muted it when you went to
sleep"

Heck, my panel mount 300XL seems like a stone tablet now... talk about
refresh time!

Loving it all

Jay Honeck wrote:
I also use the zoom-out, pan, zoom-in technique and that works much better than
trying to scroll over long distances while zoomed in.


How do you get around the problem of detail disappearing when you zoom
out?

Example: Flying to Michigan, we wanted to see what the weather was
like in Joliet, IL -- an area of questionable weather.

If you zoom out so that you don't have to "slew" (or scroll), Joliet
disappears. You then have to put your cursor where you *think* Joliet
is, and hit the "zoom in" button to see it again.

If you set detail levels to so that Joliet doesn't disappear at that
zoom level, you can't see it, cuz it's buried in too many airports.

Worse, not all airports are weather reporting stations -- and those
cute little triangles (that indicate XM weather reporting) also
disappear when you zoom out. Now, you're stuck selecting an area and
zooming in on it, hoping that there will be a reporting station there
-- wherever "there" is.

The only solution we've found is to slew around, and put up with the
slow refresh rate.

Ultimately, the solution will come when Garmin (or Lowrance)
incorporates weather into a larger display that can display everything
in a readable format at a usable zoom level.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In article . com,
"Jay Honeck" wrote:
How do you get around the problem of detail disappearing when you zoom
out?

Example: Flying to Michigan, we wanted to see what the weather was
like in Joliet, IL -- an area of questionable weather.

If you zoom out so that you don't have to "slew" (or scroll), Joliet
disappears. You then have to put your cursor where you *think* Joliet
is, and hit the "zoom in" button to see it again.

Presumably you know approximately where Joliet is in IL, correct? You
can zoom out, then position the cursor over the approximate location,
zoom in a little more (now you see IL), position the cursor more
accurately, and zoom in further. No scrolling required.

Alternately, if Joliet is in your flight plan route, simply go to the
route page and select it to see the weather at that point in your route.
No scrolling required.

If you had an instrument rating you'd probably be more concerned with
the NEXRAD image and convective activity than enroute surface
observations, and that information can be obtained without zooming in to
the individual airport. Also, don't forget about NRST weather.

I haven't tried it, but I'll bet if you turned off terrain shading on
the base map, scrolling performance would improve significantly.


JKG

Jay Honeck wrote:
I also use the zoom-out, pan, zoom-in technique and that works much better than
trying to scroll over long distances while zoomed in.


How do you get around the problem of detail disappearing when you zoom
out?

I don't get around it, I just don't see it as a serious problem.

Example: Flying to Michigan, we wanted to see what the weather was
like in Joliet, IL -- an area of questionable weather.

If you zoom out so that you don't have to "slew" (or scroll), Joliet
disappears. You then have to put your cursor where you *think* Joliet
is, and hit the "zoom in" button to see it again.

Yep. Not too hard.

If you set detail levels to so that Joliet doesn't disappear at that
zoom level, you can't see it, cuz it's buried in too many airports.

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

Worse, not all airports are weather reporting stations -- and those
cute little triangles (that indicate XM weather reporting) also
disappear when you zoom out. Now, you're stuck selecting an area and
zooming in on it, hoping that there will be a reporting station there
-- wherever "there" is.

XM doesn't get to decide which airports report weather. As far as I know, any
airport that reports SAs shows up on the XM display. Is your experience different?

The only solution we've found is to slew around, and put up with the
slow refresh rate.

You could demand a refund, then take the money and go buy the unit that works
better.

Ultimately, the solution will come when Garmin (or Lowrance)
incorporates weather into a larger display that can display everything
in a readable format at a usable zoom level.

While we're waiting, I'll just enjoy my 396.

Dave

Jay Honeck wrote:
My question is for those of you that have tried out both systems. Is the
496 REALLY worth .6 AMU's more than the 396?

The main money difference is the addition of the auto kit. The added
features are the runway layouts for larger airports (that I don't
frequent) and the AOPA directory (in a font size that I would find
impossible to read). The big book does fine for me. Oh yeah, the
"faster" screen refresh.

When I looked around, I saw that recent "factory refurbished" Magellan
auto units can be had for $500 or less with a warranty. I thought that
may make better sense than trying to "secure" my new $2300 396 Garmin
unit once I arrived at my destination. There is NO WAY you would leave
the Garmin in the car while parked in downtown Chicago. So, what are you
supposed to do with it? Carry it around? If they stole a $500 auto unit,
I would be ****ed off at around level 4. Ripping off my 396 (or 496)
would put me around a "9" on the PO Meter.

Others find the delay/blankout and awkward slew annoying. So far, it is
only a minor inconvenience. Guess I don't fly far enough away (Hey, its
a 140, where the heck am I gonna go?)

So, if you really WANT the auto kit and can USE the runway diagrams and
AOPA catalog, the numbers may add up to buy the 496.

I was not too concerned that the 496 came out a couple of weeks after
the 396 purchase. Had I known, I would likely still buy the 396.

Good Luck,
Mike