GNS 430W vs GNS 480

On Jan 1, 5:44 pm, "Roy N5804F"
wrote:
"JD" wrote in ooglegroups.com...







On Jan 1, 5:17 pm, "Roy N5804F"
wrote:

Why is a new version of the software is required and what changes it will
introduce ?

I don't know what v3.0 firmware for the 480 will bring. The current 480
firmware is 2.1, so 3.0 should have some significate enhancements. I
just got this from the support guys when I was upgrading to 2.1

When did Garmin announced that they will "continue development and
support
for the 480" ?
What do all the aircraft fitted with only dual 430/530's use for primary
enroute navigation under instrument rules ?

What ever they have been using. Could be VOR for example.I do believe that the updated software for the 480 is required to cure
existing problems found with the 480 during /W certification for the
430/530 units ?

The VOR portion is an integral part of the 430/530 so I would dispute that
the 430/530's are certified for enroute in a normal certified IFR
installation.

Am I wrong again ?

Roy, could just be a time lag in reading/posting, but the 530/430s ARE
NOT currently certified for PRIMARY ENROUTE NAVIGATION, IFR or
otherwise.

"JD" wrote in message
ups.com...


On Jan 1, 5:39 pm, "JD" wrote:
480 is more capable (has holds, etc), but the 430 is *MUCH* easier
to use. If you are a computer geek, go with the 480. If you want easy
of flying, go with the 430. If you think you may want to fly G1000
someday, go with the 430 because the nav side is right from a 430.

-Robert, CFIII tend to disagree with Robert, I think the 480 has a more
intutive
user interface.

"Ad-hoc" holds: You can define a hold point at any user waypoint or
database point. Specify the leg lenght in mins or miles/Kilomiles
(grin), direction of turns, etc.. The 480/GPSS will drive the hold for
you.

And, also, it'll tell you what kind of entry to use, teardrop, direct,
etc..


As does the 530.

I have a real problem with your statement that the 430/530 is not enroute
certified. They are all that is fitted into the bird I fly we fly IFR all
the time.

"JD" wrote:
On Jan 1, 5:44 pm, "Roy N5804F"
wrote:
"JD" wrote in
ooglegroups.com...
On Jan 1, 5:17 pm, "Roy N5804F"
wrote:
What do all the aircraft fitted with only dual 430/530's use for
primary enroute navigation under instrument rules ?

What ever they have been using. Could be VOR for example.I do
believe that the updated software for the 480 is required to cure
existing problems found with the 480 during /W certification for the
430/530 units ?

The VOR portion is an integral part of the 430/530 so I would
dispute that the 430/530's are certified for enroute in a normal
certified IFR installation.

Am I wrong again ?

Roy, could just be a time lag in reading/posting, but the 530/430s ARE
NOT currently certified for PRIMARY ENROUTE NAVIGATION, IFR or
otherwise.

I think Roy is correct. The 430/530 *GPS* function is not approved for primary nav, but the built-in VOR
receiver could serve as the required additional means of navigation. The issue is not the box failing, it's
the loss of RAIM integrity with the older TSO C129a GPS boxes. This limitation goes away with the
WAAS approval.

Mike

"Roy N5804F" wrote in message
ink.net...


The VOR portion is an integral part of the 430/530 so I would dispute
that the 430/530's are certified for enroute in a normal certified IFR
installation.

Am I wrong again ?


I don't have direct personal knowledge of this, but I have read in several
places and have been told that the radios are on a separate power supply
from the GPS receiver. I don't know how the display is driven and powered,
if it is independent of the GPS portion.

On Jan 1, 6:02 pm, Mike Adams wrote:
"JD" wrote:
On Jan 1, 5:44 pm, "Roy N5804F"
wrote:
"JD" wrote in
ooglegroups.com...
On Jan 1, 5:17 pm, "Roy N5804F"
wrote:
What do all the aircraft fitted with only dual 430/530's use for
primary enroute navigation under instrument rules ?

What ever they have been using. Could be VOR for example.I do
believe that the updated software for the 480 is required to cure
existing problems found with the 480 during /W certification for the
430/530 units ?

The VOR portion is an integral part of the 430/530 so I would
dispute that the 430/530's are certified for enroute in a normal
certified IFR installation.

Am I wrong again ?

Roy, could just be a time lag in reading/posting, but the 530/430s ARE
NOT currently certified for PRIMARY ENROUTE NAVIGATION, IFR or
otherwise.I think Roy is correct. The 430/530 *GPS* function is not approved for primary nav, but the built-in VOR
receiver could serve as the required additional means of navigation. The issue is not the box failing, it's
the loss of RAIM integrity with the older TSO C129a GPS boxes. This limitation goes away with the
WAAS approval.

Mike

From Garmin's news letter:
http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/aviation/110906.html

"*Due to the TSO limitation in conjunction with the AFMS limitation,
Garmin's GNS 400/500 series navigators will not be certified as a
"primary means" of GPS navigation until after customers install a new
software version. Garmin expects to issue a Service Bulletin in the
first quarter of 2007 issuing the software. The software will be
updated via the 400/500W data loader card. This required software
update is expected to be available in the first quarter of 2007."

"JD" wrote:

On Jan 1, 6:02 pm, Mike Adams wrote:
I think Roy is correct. The 430/530 *GPS* function is not
approved for primary nav, but the built-in VOR
receiver could serve as the required additional means of navigation.
The issue is not the box failing, it's the loss of RAIM integrity
with the older TSO C129a GPS boxes. This limitation goes away with
the WAAS approval.

Mike

From Garmin's news letter:
http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/aviation/110906.html

"*Due to the TSO limitation in conjunction with the AFMS limitation,
Garmin's GNS 400/500 series navigators will not be certified as a
"primary means" of GPS navigation until after customers install a new
software version. Garmin expects to issue a Service Bulletin in the
first quarter of 2007 issuing the software. The software will be
updated via the 400/500W data loader card. This required software
update is expected to be available in the first quarter of 2007."


Yes, I think we're saying the same thing. The 430W/530W will have primary means capability with this
new software version. This is the "WAAS approval" I referred to above. I interpreted Roy's question to be
regarding the basic 530 capability prior to the /W upgrade. The TSO C129a GPS approval is just for
supplemental nav, so the internal VOR can be used as the backup.

Mike

In article . com,
"JD" wrote:

480 is more capable (has holds, etc), but the 430 is *MUCH* easier
to use. If you are a computer geek, go with the 480. If you want easy
of flying, go with the 430. If you think you may want to fly G1000
someday, go with the 430 because the nav side is right from a 430.

-Robert, CFII

I tend to disagree with Robert, I think the 480 has a more intutive
user interface.

"Ad-hoc" holds: You can define a hold point at any user waypoint or
database point. Specify the leg lenght in mins or miles/Kilomiles
(grin), direction of turns, etc.. The 480/GPSS will drive the hold for
you.

One thing about holds on the 480 that's counter-intuitive is that the
inbound leg is always defined in terms of "course to". If ATC says
"hold south of Carmel VOR on the 180 radial", you have to enter "360" on
the hold screen. If you enter "180", you end up holding north.

Of course, one could argue that the classic phrasology for describing a VOR
hold is counter-intuitive, and the GPS does it "right". In any case, it is
different, and I've seen it be a cause of confusion when teaching people
how to use the box.

Mike,
My understanding that WAAS usage has been approved for landings, but
not for GPS navigation, seems screwy, but what's new?

On Jan 1, 6:24 pm, Mike Adams wrote:
"JD" wrote:
On Jan 1, 6:02 pm, Mike Adams wrote:
I think Roy is correct. The 430/530 *GPS* function is not
approved for primary nav, but the built-in VOR
receiver could serve as the required additional means of navigation.
The issue is not the box failing, it's the loss of RAIM integrity
with the older TSO C129a GPS boxes. This limitation goes away with
the WAAS approval.

Mike

From Garmin's news letter:
http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/aviation/110906.html

"*Due to the TSO limitation in conjunction with the AFMS limitation,
Garmin's GNS 400/500 series navigators will not be certified as a
"primary means" of GPS navigation until after customers install a new
software version. Garmin expects to issue a Service Bulletin in the
first quarter of 2007 issuing the software. The software will be
updated via the 400/500W data loader card. This required software
update is expected to be available in the first quarter of 2007."Yes, I think we're saying the same thing. The 430W/530W will have primary means capability with this
new software version. This is the "WAAS approval" I referred to above. I interpreted Roy's question to be
regarding the basic 530 capability prior to the /W upgrade. The TSO C129a GPS approval is just for
supplemental nav, so the internal VOR can be used as the backup.

Mike

Stan Prevost wrote:

Not sure of your exact meaning of "ad-hoc" holds, unless you mean
unpublished holds.

Unpublished, on-the-fly, unscripted, given by ATC to slow traffic, etc.
Actually unpublished might not be the correct term either, since as far as
I know the GNS430W does not have en route holds (holds that are published
on en route charts) in its database.

I don't see any problem with the 430 in performing holds
on any course at any fix or at present position. It won't provide any
positive course guidance except on the inbound leg at any hold, published or
unpublished.

But once the GNS430 is upgraded to the WAAS feature-set, it appears (based
on the sim) that the unit will be able to provide positive course guidance
completely around holds that are published on terminal charts. That is
what I discovered when playing with the GNS430W sim.


--
Peter

JD wrote:

And, also, it'll tell you what kind of entry to use, teardrop, direct,
etc..

The GNS430W/530W will do this for terminal chart-published holds, too.

--
Peter