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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter R." wrote: wrote: Another big "if" is whether WAAS and LPV will be around 5 years from now. Now this speculation is something I never read before. What would be the reason for the demise of this technology, assuming it does not survive the next several years? The primary GPS system is operated by the military and has huge benefits for them. It also has huge benefits to much of the population beyond the military and beyond aviation. The incremential cost to operate the system for all civil users is zero. The system is useful through the entire world. WAAS, OTOH, is a United States system funded and operated by the FAA. It is only useful in the United States and some nearby areas. It is a different implementation of GPS augmentation protocol than proposed by a few other countries. WAAS functions through transponders rented by the FAA on commercial satellites, plus several expensive ground stations. The operating costs are in the hundreds of millions of dollars a year. The system is being used by a very small part of general aviation. Most air carrier and biz jets have no need for WAAS at all, plus it dies as soon as they fly off shore. The bean counters at the FAA have trouble keep justifying this huge annual expense for very little benefit. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
PPT33R wrote: I can't see that happening, especially when RNP is being deployed commercially. Boeing & Airbus are now certifying their newer airframes for RNP .1, which allegedly integrates GPS, INS, and DME into the FMS. The GPS portion requires RAIM and is much more reliable with WAAS. TIS, on the other hand, is a whole other issue... I am involved in the work being done with RNP. WAAS is not part of the calculus at all in the FMS sensor hierarcy for RNP_SAAAR instrument approach procedures. RNP 0.10 is acheived through complex interfaces of FMS software with GPS as the primary sensor. WAAS is not used. The most robust platforms (dual-thread aircraft, which will be a requirement where RNP is needed for the missed approach, use blended, updated IRU position along with GPS (or without GPS for a reasonable period of time in the event GPS suddently fails). WAAS's primary benefit is to provide the LPV glide-path for the LPV final approach segment. The RNP_SAAAR criteria's final approach segment glide-path is predicated on IFR-certified Baro VNAV. As an aside, when the FAA commissioned WAAS, they "dumbed down" the Baro VNAV criteria for public RNAV (GPS) IAPs, which increased existing VNAV minimums. This was a blatent political move to make LPV minimums look better. The assessment concets for the VNAV obstacle clearance surfaces in the RNP_SAAAR environment rightfully do an end-run around the dumbing down of public VNAV obstacle clearance criteria. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
PPT33R wrote: You have to place the order, but the Garmin rep told me they won't charge you until they ship. The other issue I have is the initial demand will be very high, so expect to be without your box for a couple months or more. How will I be compensated for my aircraft down-time whilst my 530 is off at Garmin? Did Garmin promise an eventual upgrade to WAAS when you bought your 530? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Did Garmin promise an eventual upgrade to WAAS when you bought your 530? Yes |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Another big "if" is whether WAAS and LPV will be around 5 years from now. What makes you think it will not? -------------------- Richard Kaplan www.flyimc.com |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Richard Kaplan wrote: wrote in message ... Another big "if" is whether WAAS and LPV will be around 5 years from now. What makes you think it will not? -------------------- Richard Kaplan www.flyimc.com Read my response right above your message; the one at 6:41. ;-) |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Brad Salai wrote:
I've been trying to convince my club to consider the 480 over the 530, any thoughts on that? If you're going to fly IFR, the 480 is the way to go. While it's (by history) different than EVERY other Garmin GPS out there, it is more straight forward for IFR ops. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Tim wrote:
snip The system is being used by a very small part of general aviation. Are you saying that WAAS is only used by the aviation community? What about those who use WAAS-enabled handheld GPS units for boating, driving, and hiking/backpacking? Oh, and don't forget the geo-cachers. ;-) -- Peter |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Please don't flame me for this thought .. As much as I hate it when I see
these bs class action lawsuits were the lawyers make millions and the consumer gets a $5.00 coupon. I am surprised no one has mentioned legal action for the falsely advertised waas upgrade. Any thoughts on the merits of this ? No thoughts needed on lawsuits in general. And yes I do own a 530 and have for at least a few years and have called my dealer to order all the upgrades I keep hearing about but are never available ( terrain warning, waas ). Take care.. JG. "PPT33R" wrote in message oups.com... I recently made an inquiry to Garmin regarding their new requirement that GNS 430/530 owners pre-order the WAAS upgrade prior to November 2005 to guarantee the $1500 price their marketing department has been stating for the past 2 years... Keeping in mind the WAAS upgrade for these boxes are already years overdue, and Garmin does not have much of a track record for meeting their own schedules. I don't see any guarantee they can make their new date in late 06. I asked the 'insane' question, "What if Garmin pushes this date once again and I move far away from the dealer I placed my upgrade order with?" A Garmin rep stated I would have to cancel the original order and forfeit the $1500 upgrade price to whatever the final price turns out to be... I am leery of placing an order with this kind of company. I just don't trust them anymore. They sold the GNS 430/530 as WAAS upgradeable for a reasonable cost, period. I called Garmin corporate to confirm when I bought my box. Now years later, constant delays and restrictive terms and conditions are getting irritating. What kind of company requires a pre-order of an upgrade promised years ago, that won't be delivered for at least another year and a half? While my box is out of the aircraft, will they provide a 'loaner' so I can still use my aircraft, or am I just SOL until they decide to return my box? WOULD SOMEBODY PLEASE GIVE GARMIN SOME REAL COMPETITION? They really need to be taken down a peg or two. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message ... Brad Salai wrote: I've been trying to convince my club to consider the 480 over the 530, any thoughts on that? If you're going to fly IFR, the 480 is the way to go. While it's (by history) different than EVERY other Garmin GPS out there, it is more straight forward for IFR ops. I'd like to dump my KLN94 and go to a GPS480 with an AviDyne MX-500. One problem is the GPS480 does not support curved flight paths (GAMA) that a GPS 430 does. I wonder if I should go with a dual GPS in the form of a GPS 430/ 480 combo? Would it work? -- Matt --------------------- Matthew W. Barrow Site-Fill Homes, LLC. Montrose, CO |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
More info on GNS 430/530 WAAS upgrade | PPT33R | Instrument Flight Rules | 33 | June 24th 05 02:21 PM |
Any inside story re 430/530 WAAS cert.? | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | May 20th 05 06:13 PM |
WAAS and Garmin 430/530 | DoodyButch | Owning | 23 | October 13th 03 04:06 AM |
Terminology of New WAAS, VNAV, LPV approach types | Tarver Engineering | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | August 5th 03 03:50 AM |
Big News -- WAAS GPS is Operational for IFR | Lockheed employee | Instrument Flight Rules | 87 | July 30th 03 02:08 AM |