New Garmin 396

In article 1120946772.bdcbdac7353f6e551facbb6a46d64e8a@teran ews,
"Richard Kaplan" wrote:
For a portable weather system--no question about it. However, if you're
an aircraft owner and never move the weather system, it's a moot point.

Less significant, yes. Moot, no. It is still a piece of equipment which
needs either a quasi-permanent power connection to ship's power or else
regular recharging or replacing of batteries.

How is this any different than the Garmin 396? As far as I see it, it
isn't much different from the pilot's perspective. It's fairly painless
to practice some basic cable management and power becomes a non-issue.


It is relevant to renter pilots in particular because it is by far the
easiest way to put both GPS navigation and weather in a rental airplane.
Sure you can set up an XM receiver, Bluetooth GPS, and PDA whenever you rent
a plane, but that is a lot more work then plugging in a 396.

I'm not disputing that, but in this section, I was responding to your
comments regarding integration with the 430/530. I doubt that many
airplanes in the rental fleet will have the interface available for that
type of integration.



Yes it is if you are talking about an IFR situation when you need to enter
flight plan or navaid info into panel-mount IFR equipment and then duplicate
it in a portable GPS and then reprogram both when you receive changes in
routings or approach clearances enroute. For VFR flight this is not a huge
issue; for IFR flight the convenience from the crossfed data is HUGE.

In my experience, entering a flight plan in a PDA or TabletPC is easier
than with the Garmin units. I have over 20 hours of IFR flight on the
PDA system, and I've had to change flight plans, but it's no big deal
because I have a keyboard at my fingertips. Would it be nice to do it
once a push a button, sure, but I doubt that most users of the 396 will
interface it with a 430/530.



and I probably wouldn't hesitate to use the Tablet or
PDA for primary enroute navigation if I had a panel mount that wasn't
doing anything other than navigation anyway.

That is fine for VFR but not IFR.

Not sure why it isn't fine for IFR. It's perfectly safe and it's legal
enroute if you are in a radar environment.



Yes, I am referring to the "Vertical Speed to Target" feature of the Garmin
portables (and some Lowrance units as well). This is a highly desirable
feature for executing a deadstick landing when VFR or especially IFR or at
night.

Not sure how this works exactly, but there are software packages that
offer similar types of emergency glide features for other systems.


renter pilot, the 396 would be an ideal system due to its easy
portability. If I was an owner serious about certified weather uplink
and features not available on the 430/530, I think I'd investigate
selling the 430/530 and buying another certified system that can better
serve my needs.

There is no such thing as certified weather uplink -- it is easier panel or
portable.

I was referring to weather uplink to a certified panel-mount GPS.



That is one of the key points... the terrain feature of the 296 is
stupendous and ought to be considered the Product of the Year -- in many
ways its terrain implementation is superior to that on much more expensive
panel solutions such as an MX20 or an EX500.


Maybe, but I still contend that the landscape display orientation of the
296/396 and some units before them is less-than-ideal. The display
resolution itself really isn't that nice either. Other software vendors
have better terrain features, but I guess some folks just like to see
"Garmin" on their navigation equipment.


I'm not arguing that the 396 is a bad unit; quite to the contrary, it
looks like a great unit. I just don't think that it is going to "kill
off" all of the PDA/TabletPC competitors like some folks seem to
suggest. For example, WxWorx appeals to a wide audience and provides
capability that the 396 can't match, as does Control Vision's product.
There are plenty of others out there who may find their systems a hard
sell over the 396, though.



JKG

Jonathan Goodish wrote:

I'm not arguing that the 396 is a bad unit; quite to the contrary, it
looks like a great unit. I just don't think that it is going to "kill
off" all of the PDA/TabletPC competitors like some folks seem to
suggest. For example, WxWorx appeals to a wide audience and provides
capability that the 396 can't match, as does Control Vision's product.
There are plenty of others out there who may find their systems a hard
sell over the 396, though.

Not trying to pick sides or gang up on anyone, but I agree with most
every point Richard Kaplan made in your discussion. And I also agree
the impact on the PDA weather/GPS market is going to be, NO DOUBT ABOUT
IT, HUGE! This is the box GA pilots want. I'd argue that the majority
of pilots, by far, are not techie gearheads who want to futz with
configuration issues, deal with Bluetooth, a stylus, a rat's nest of
wires, etc. They want something that works, PERIOD, and that is why
it's so desirable to see "Garmin" on the box.

I've avoided CV's products for all of the issues Richard mentioned, and
I am excited to be getting my hands on a 396 just as soon as I can.
I've heard more than a few comments to this effect, including current
and former CV customers looking to make the switch. Garmin's going to
make a few (big) waves, no doubt.

-Ryan

In article ,
Ryan Ferguson wrote:
Not trying to pick sides or gang up on anyone, but I agree with most
every point Richard Kaplan made in your discussion. And I also agree
the impact on the PDA weather/GPS market is going to be, NO DOUBT ABOUT
IT, HUGE! This is the box GA pilots want. I'd argue that the majority
of pilots, by far, are not techie gearheads who want to futz with
configuration issues, deal with Bluetooth, a stylus, a rat's nest of
wires, etc. They want something that works, PERIOD, and that is why
it's so desirable to see "Garmin" on the box.

I am amazed that folks are predicting that the 396 is going to be the
holy grail of handhelds when, to my knowledge, no one so far in this
thread has touched one.

Secondly, the configuration issues that Richard speaks of are overblown
in my experience. He has continued to reiterate his own points, which
is fine, but some of them I've refuted. I do have a PDA system with XM
weather and I NEVER have to touch Bluetooth configuration or "manage"
the Bluetooth connections. Things may be different on a TabletPC, or
for those trying to do other things with their PDAs, but out of the box
they seem pretty much plug-and-play to me. They obviously aren't as
integrated as the 396, but that has both advantages and disadvantages.
Many of the XM problems reported by CV and WxWorx on Wings users seem
related to XM, so there is no guarantee that Garmin's users won't
experience them too.

The entire discussion began when Richard suggested that the 396 would
have less wires running to it than a PDA. With a Bluetooth capable PDA,
a Bluetooth GPS, and Bluetooth XM receiver, that assertion is false. I
simply stated that and then things started to snowball.

I am not anti-Garmin. I do like Garmin's products, and I presently own
and use two Garmin GPS units regularly. However, contrary to popular
belief, Garmin's products are computers and their software does have
bugs. Also, before I'm ready to declare that the 396 solves world
hunger, I'd like to see it or at least hear from those who have seen it
and used it. I suspect that we will have many hands-on reports posted
in a couple of weeks, after Oshkosh.



I've avoided CV's products for all of the issues Richard mentioned, and
I am excited to be getting my hands on a 396 just as soon as I can.
I've heard more than a few comments to this effect, including current
and former CV customers looking to make the switch. Garmin's going to
make a few (big) waves, no doubt.

What issues did Rich mention about CV's products? In fact, I didn't see
any negative comments or issues reported about CV's products in this
thread. What am I missing?



JKG

In article ,
Jonathan Goodish wrote:
The entire discussion began when Richard suggested that the 396 would
have less wires running to it than a PDA. With a Bluetooth capable PDA,
a Bluetooth GPS, and Bluetooth XM receiver, that assertion is false. I
simply stated that and then things started to snowball.

I do need to be fair by saying that I value Richard Kaplan's opinion
highly, even when I don't agree with it. In this case, it is my opinion
that Richard and others are relatively caught up in the hype surrounding
a new product that looks very promising. I will be very interested to
hear user reports once they start coming in, but until then, I'd rather
not try to sell a product that hasn't shipped yet.



JKG

"Jonathan Goodish" wrote:
I will be very interested to
hear user reports once they start coming in, but until then, I'd
rather
not try to sell a product that hasn't shipped yet.

I agree. This appears to be exactly the GPS/wx solution I've been
looking for, but at $2,495 list it's too pricey to tempt me until I've
heard what the early adopters say.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"Jonathan Goodish" wrote

How is this any different than the Garmin 396? As far as I see it, it
isn't much different from the pilot's perspective.

It is quite a bit different. The 396 can be charged in advance and thus
does not require ship's power at all. There is a grand total of one
required cable for the 396 and that is the cable from the smart antenna to
the GPS. That is a complete non-issue in even an rental plane.

It's fairly painless
to practice some basic cable management and power becomes a non-issue.

Doable? Yes. Painless? No.

It is not painless for someone who rents a plane and has to run cables every
time he rents the plae.

I'm not disputing that, but in this section, I was responding to your
comments regarding integration with the 430/530.
I doubt that many
airplanes in the rental fleet will have the interface available for that
type of integration.

Absolutely agreed. I am simply showing the advantages of the 396 to both
renter and owner pilots.

In my experience, entering a flight plan in a PDA or TabletPC is easier
than with the Garmin units.

Definitely not. Turning knobs on a panel-mount is much less time-consuming
than pressing buttons to scroll through the alphabet.

Besides, for IFR presumably the PDA will be a backup but not the primary nav
source so any way you look at it you will have to duplicate your flight plan
entries -- such duplication is very much undesirable when busy with other
things in IMC.

PDA system, and I've had to change flight plans, but it's no big deal
because I have a keyboard at my fingertips.

It is a nuisance to have to change flight plans on both your primary and
backup nav sources - that is highly undesirable.


Would it be nice to do it
once a push a button, sure, but I doubt that most users of the 396 will
interface it with a 430/530.

Well the 430/530 are extremely popular. It is hard for me to imagine why a
430/530 owner would choose a portable GPS model that will not interface with
the 430/530. The parts/labor to interface the 430/530 to the 396 cost
perhaps 2% of the total cost of the 430/530 installation. I am not saying
all 430/530 owners need a 396 but it is inconceivable to me for someone to
install such an IFR GPS and then not be willing to pay $400 for a used 195
and $150 to an avionics shop to interface the two. That is a bargain if
ever I saw one in aviation.

Not sure why it isn't fine for IFR. It's perfectly safe and it's legal
enroute if you are in a radar environment.

It is indeed legal in a radar environment. But it is not legal on an
approach. And it is also a good idea to be prepared at any time with Plan B
if radar services are terminated. At that point IFR certified panel
avionics are required.

Not sure how this works exactly, but there are software packages that
offer similar types of emergency glide features for other systems.

Lowrance has similar VNAV on its high-end models. The Chelton glass EFIS
system has superior VNAV capabilities. There is no other general aviation
system available at any price that is as capable as Garmin VNAV in the event
of an engine-out emergency.

Maybe, but I still contend that the landscape display orientation of the
296/396 and some units before them is less-than-ideal. The display
resolution itself really isn't that nice either. Other software vendors
have better terrain features, but I guess some folks just like to see
"Garmin" on their navigation equipment.

I do not know of any other software vendor with a better terrain feature
than Garmin on a portable unit. Terrain warnings on a 296 are actually
substantially superior to even panel-mount terrain features on an MX20 or
EX500. But again, the VNAV feature of the Garmin portable GPS is so good as
to make the point moot. Lowrance is just about the only competition to
Garmin.


I'm not arguing that the 396 is a bad unit; quite to the contrary, it
looks like a great unit. I just don't think that it is going to "kill
off" all of the PDA/TabletPC competitors like some folks seem to
suggest.

You are correct that the competition you mention will continue. But that
will only be the case because of customers who are highly price-sensitive or
who perhaps are not aware in detail of the features discussed above. Anyone
with any concern at all about handling an engine-out failure would choose a
Garmin handheld hands-down.

For example, WxWorx appeals to a wide audience and provides
capability that the 396 can't match

What features can the 396 not match? The only ones I can think of are
point-and-click echo tops and radar intensity made possible by a mouse or
tablet interface; the other features I mentioned more than balance that out.

as does Control Vision's product.

Control Visions's "Cones of Safety" feature is nice indeed. But it only
tells you where you can glide; it does not tell you HOW to glide there, i.e.
how fast, as the Garmin portables do.

--------------------
Richard Kaplan

www.flyimc.com

"Jonathan Goodish" wrote in message

I will be very interested to
hear user reports once they start coming in, but until then, I'd rather
not try to sell a product that hasn't shipped yet.

That is an excellent point. It could well be that when it arrives the smart
antenna is too big to be practical or that the screen is to small to view
the wealth of available information.

On the other hand, Garmin used portable GPS receivers have always held their
value well on the used market. A great feature of portable avionics is that
if you do not like them there is no cost to uninstall them from your
airplane. The risk is not too great to buy a 396 and then sell it used on
Ebay if you do not like it; availability will probably be so tight initially
that the economic risk to doing so will be minimal.

--------------------
Richard Kaplan

www.flyimc.com

"Jonathan Goodish" wrote

How is this any different than the Garmin 396? As far as I see it, it
isn't much different from the pilot's perspective.

It is quite a bit different. The 396 can be charged in advance and thus
does not require ship's power at all. There is a grand total of one
required cable for the 396 and that is the cable from the smart antenna to
the GPS. That is a complete non-issue in even an rental plane.

It's fairly painless
to practice some basic cable management and power becomes a non-issue.

Doable? Yes. Painless? No.

It is not painless for someone who rents a plane and has to run cables every
time he rents the plae.

I'm not disputing that, but in this section, I was responding to your
comments regarding integration with the 430/530.
I doubt that many
airplanes in the rental fleet will have the interface available for that
type of integration.

Absolutely agreed. I am simply showing the advantages of the 396 to both
renter and owner pilots.

In my experience, entering a flight plan in a PDA or TabletPC is easier
than with the Garmin units.

Definitely not. Turning knobs on a panel-mount is much less time-consuming
than pressing buttons to scroll through the alphabet.

Besides, for IFR presumably the PDA will be a backup but not the primary nav
source so any way you look at it you will have to duplicate your flight plan
entries -- such duplication is very much undesirable when busy with other
things in IMC.

PDA system, and I've had to change flight plans, but it's no big deal
because I have a keyboard at my fingertips.

It is a nuisance to have to change flight plans on both your primary and
backup nav sources - that is highly undesirable.


Would it be nice to do it
once a push a button, sure, but I doubt that most users of the 396 will
interface it with a 430/530.

Well the 430/530 are extremely popular. It is hard for me to imagine why a
430/530 owner would choose a portable GPS model that will not interface with
the 430/530. The parts/labor to interface the 430/530 to the 396 cost
perhaps 2% of the total cost of the 430/530 installation. I am not saying
all 430/530 owners need a 396 but it is inconceivable to me for someone to
install such an IFR GPS and then not be willing to pay $400 for a used 195
and $150 to an avionics shop to interface the two. That is a bargain if
ever I saw one in aviation.

Not sure why it isn't fine for IFR. It's perfectly safe and it's legal
enroute if you are in a radar environment.

It is indeed legal in a radar environment. But it is not legal on an
approach. And it is also a good idea to be prepared at any time with Plan B
if radar services are terminated. At that point IFR certified panel
avionics are required.

Not sure how this works exactly, but there are software packages that
offer similar types of emergency glide features for other systems.

Lowrance has similar VNAV on its high-end models. The Chelton glass EFIS
system has superior VNAV capabilities. There is no other general aviation
system available at any price that is as capable as Garmin VNAV in the event
of an engine-out emergency.

Maybe, but I still contend that the landscape display orientation of the
296/396 and some units before them is less-than-ideal. The display
resolution itself really isn't that nice either. Other software vendors
have better terrain features, but I guess some folks just like to see
"Garmin" on their navigation equipment.

I do not know of any other software vendor with a better terrain feature
than Garmin on a portable unit. Terrain warnings on a 296 are actually
substantially superior to even panel-mount terrain features on an MX20 or
EX500. But again, the VNAV feature of the Garmin portable GPS is so good as
to make the point moot. Lowrance is just about the only competition to
Garmin.


I'm not arguing that the 396 is a bad unit; quite to the contrary, it
looks like a great unit. I just don't think that it is going to "kill
off" all of the PDA/TabletPC competitors like some folks seem to
suggest.

You are correct that the competition you mention will continue. But that
will only be the case because of customers who are highly price-sensitive or
who perhaps are not aware in detail of the features discussed above. Anyone
with any concern at all about handling an engine-out failure would choose a
Garmin handheld hands-down.

For example, WxWorx appeals to a wide audience and provides
capability that the 396 can't match

What features can the 396 not match? The only ones I can think of are
point-and-click echo tops and radar intensity made possible by a mouse or
tablet interface; the other features I mentioned more than balance that out.

as does Control Vision's product.

Control Visions's "Cones of Safety" feature is nice indeed. But it only
tells you where you can glide; it does not tell you HOW to glide there, i.e.
how fast, as the Garmin portables do.


--------------------
Richard Kaplan

www.flyimc.com

In article 1120968238.3ff1e0afbbb3cd058381c5a3d8350c74@teran ews,
"Richard Kaplan" wrote:
That is an excellent point. It could well be that when it arrives the smart
antenna is too big to be practical or that the screen is to small to view
the wealth of available information.


The display is my primary concern. Why would I buy this device,
portability aside, for a primary weather display when the display itself
is lousy?

I am particularly interested to hear how the 396 handles the XM issues
that folks have reported with WxWorx on Wings and other products. I
haven't experienced them myself (knock on wood), but they seem to be
inherent in the XM delivery system, so I doubt that Garmin will be able
to work around them.



JKG

In article 1120968814.beb91d06ff252e3408ac55cbbe854c5c@teran ews,
"Richard Kaplan" wrote:
It is quite a bit different. The 396 can be charged in advance and thus
does not require ship's power at all. There is a grand total of one
required cable for the 396 and that is the cable from the smart antenna to
the GPS. That is a complete non-issue in even an rental plane.

Well, a PDA/TabletPC and BT GPS can be charged in advance also,
requiring a grand total of zero cables. If I were to have an alternator
failure, continuation into or in close proximity to severe weather
wouldn't be of interest to me, so losing weather information wouldn't be
critical. Even so, there are simple work-around to relying on ship's
power. These problems aren't rocket science, and they don't require an
engineering degree to solve. For a truly portable system, there is no
doubt that the 396 is a winner over competing solutions.


I am going to avoid the remainder of your nit-picking by reiterating my
two main points, which may not have been super-obvious until now:

1--The 396 hasn't shipped yet, so no one knows how, or how well, it will
work.

2--We do know that the 396 has a small and rather unimpressive display
based on the specifications. Compared to a TabletPC or even a modern
PDA, I'm not sure how much of a weather picture you're going to get on a
3.7" display at QVGA resolution. When comparing it to WxWorx running on
a TabletPC, I'm not sure how good it's really going to be for those
folks looking for a primary weather display.



JKG