WAAS for GNS 430/530?

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...
Matt Barrow wrote:
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...

Matt Barrow wrote:


A coupled approach does let you keep your eyes outside, especially

during

the transition phase, but how many are equipped with AP's that can do
coupled approaches?

Remember: CONTEXT.




I've got an WAAS-enabled GPS, GPSS, and an autopilot that will fly
coupled approaches.


So do I. We're a distinct minority. So what?

Remember: CONTEXT.


Anybody with a IFR capable GPS is a minority. Anybody with
a really capable IFR panel that's legal to use IFR is a minority.

What freaking CONTEXT are you talking about.

The freaking context that _very few_ GA aircraft have coupled approach
capability, that freaking context.

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...



If anything, the slight nose-down pitch attitude should make it easier
to see the runway, compared to having to search for it over the nose
in level flight after a dive-and-drive.



A factor I didn't see mentioned:

A coupled autopilot can fly a WAAS approach. It cannot do dive and drive.


A coupled approach does let you keep your eyes outside, especially during
the transition phase, but how many are equipped with AP's that can do
coupled approaches?

Remember: CONTEXT.



Most of the ones with WAAS boxes I would guess.

Mike
MU-2

"WAAS Upgradable" was a very prominent part of their advertising. If they
choose not to offer an upgrade, it becomes "non" WAAS upgradable. I imagine
this was part of the decision process for many (if not most) folks who
puchased the 430 or 530.

I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV but at the very least a whole bunch
of people would demand their money back or some return compensation for
having to switch to another box for WAAS. While not technically a lawsuit,
it will still hit them in the same spot--their bank account.

On a side note, I don't know about what you've seen, but just because it's
nonesense, it doesn't mean it's lawsuit-proof.

Marco Leon

"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...
Sue them because they woundn't upgrade their product ? Nonsense. They
never
garanteed they would support every new feature that comes out. I own a
430,
I would not participate. Its utter nonsense.

Does the computed glideslope indication meet obstacle clearance (i.e.
stepdown altitudes and whatnot) even if the approach is flown a couple
of dots low on the glideslope indication? Or does the pilot/autopilot
need to be absolutely sure that the approach is flown smack in the
middle or a couple dots high?

-Jon C.


"John R. Copeland" wrote in message
.. .

....

Regarding the "straight line from FAF to VDP passing under a
stepdown",
that's handled by a charting a delay before descending until reaching
a point
from which the stabilized descent *will* meet obstruction-clearance
criteria.
The CNX80/GNS480 follows that charting.
It does not start the descent from the FAF when it's incorrect to do
so.

"Jon Carlson" wrote:

Does the computed glideslope indication meet obstacle clearance (i.e.
stepdown altitudes and whatnot) even if the approach is flown a couple
of dots low on the glideslope indication? Or does the pilot/autopilot
need to be absolutely sure that the approach is flown smack in the
middle or a couple dots high?

I think that's kind of like asking, "Does the MDA meet obstacle clearance
even if you go below it?".

I think the answer to both questions is the same, "There's some
TERPs-defined buffer built in, but from the pilot's point of view, all you
gotta know is don't go below what the procedure says until you can see the
runway".

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...



If anything, the slight nose-down pitch attitude should make it
easier
to see the runway, compared to having to search for it over the nose
in level flight after a dive-and-drive.



A factor I didn't see mentioned:

A coupled autopilot can fly a WAAS approach. It cannot do dive and
drive.


A coupled approach does let you keep your eyes outside, especially
during
the transition phase, but how many are equipped with AP's that can do
coupled approaches?

Remember: CONTEXT.



Most of the ones with WAAS boxes I would guess.

Yes...and what proportion of GA aircraft have them? I know you do, and Ron
N. has them, I have them...but OVERALL?

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...



If anything, the slight nose-down pitch attitude should make it
easier
to see the runway, compared to having to search for it over the nose
in level flight after a dive-and-drive.



A factor I didn't see mentioned:

A coupled autopilot can fly a WAAS approach. It cannot do dive and
drive.


A coupled approach does let you keep your eyes outside, especially
during
the transition phase, but how many are equipped with AP's that can do
coupled approaches?

Remember: CONTEXT.



Most of the ones with WAAS boxes I would guess.

Yes...and what proportion of GA aircraft have them? I know you do, and Ron
N. has them, I have them...but OVERALL?


I agree that it is not many. The 480 isn't selling all that well.

Mike
MU-2

Matt Barrow wrote:
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...

Matt Barrow wrote:


A coupled approach does let you keep your eyes outside, especially

during

the transition phase, but how many are equipped with AP's that can do
coupled approaches?

Remember: CONTEXT.




I've got an WAAS-enabled GPS, GPSS, and an autopilot that will fly
coupled approaches.


So do I. We're a distinct minority. So what?

Remember: CONTEXT.



I'm hoping to join the minority.

CONTEXT.. CONTEXT... OOOHHHHMMM......

Matt Barrow wrote:
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...

Matt Barrow wrote:

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
.com...


Matt Barrow wrote:



A coupled approach does let you keep your eyes outside, especially

during


the transition phase, but how many are equipped with AP's that can do
coupled approaches?

Remember: CONTEXT.




I've got an WAAS-enabled GPS, GPSS, and an autopilot that will fly
coupled approaches.


So do I. We're a distinct minority. So what?

Remember: CONTEXT.



Anybody with a IFR capable GPS is a minority. Anybody with
a really capable IFR panel that's legal to use IFR is a minority.

What freaking CONTEXT are you talking about.


The freaking context that _very few_ GA aircraft have coupled approach
capability, that freaking context.



I flew a coupled approach once. Me and my then girlfriend got our zippers
stuck together.

Marco Leon wrote:
"WAAS Upgradable" was a very prominent part of their advertising. If they
choose not to offer an upgrade, it becomes "non" WAAS upgradable. I imagine
this was part of the decision process for many (if not most) folks who
puchased the 430 or 530.

I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV but at the very least a whole bunch
of people would demand their money back or some return compensation for
having to switch to another box for WAAS. While not technically a lawsuit,
it will still hit them in the same spot--their bank account.

On a side note, I don't know about what you've seen, but just because it's
nonesense, it doesn't mean it's lawsuit-proof.

Marco Leon

"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...

Sue them because they woundn't upgrade their product ? Nonsense. They

never

garanteed they would support every new feature that comes out. I own a

430,

I would not participate. Its utter nonsense.



Yea, they advertised WAAS upgradability when I bought mine. I assumed it
was hype. I was right ! What do I win ?