WAAS for GNS 430/530?

Matt Barrow wrote:
"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?



CONTEXT.

"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...
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......

Stupid!

PLONK

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

"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.


And Bendix/King isn't (seemingly) addressing WAAS for their product lines
below the turbine market.

I might have to ditch my KLN94...Honeywell/Bendix/King doesn't even return
my phone calls about WAAS capability/upgrades.

Scott Moore wrote:


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


Ah, but she can log it as being the sole manipulator of the pilot in
command.

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

Sort of, but one of the advantages of WAAS generated glideslopes is
that it enables autopilot coupled approaches with vertical guidance.
So... if a dot or two off runs you through a hill, that might be a
nice thing to know and correlate with your autopilot's level of
precision...


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".

Yes, we are still responsible for not descending below the MDA. But we
need to understand the limitations of the box if we're going to let
the box help us so that we can know what we have to do to live up to
those responsibilities.

-Jon C.

WAAS upgrade does not mean you gain the improved approach capability.
Garmin 196/296s have WAAS but they are a handheld.


"Marco Leon" mmleon(at)yahoo.com wrote in message
...
"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.

I contacted Garmin's customer service, and below is the reply
that I got regarding when WAAS will be available as an upgrade
for the GNS 430/530:

-- Dane

-------------------------------------------------
The WAAS upgrade will not be available till the last quarter of 2006. But
to lock in the $1500.00 price you need to contact your Garmin avionics
dealer before August and make arrangements.

George Koelsch
Garmin International
Field Service Engineer

913-397-8200
-------------------------------------------------

In article ,
Dane Spearing wrote:
According to Garmin's product literature, the GNS 430 and 530 are
"WAAS-upgradeable", yet there is no information as to when this
upgrade might be available. Does anyone have any other information
on this?

-- Dane

Is the TERPS manual available online?

wrote in message ...


Joe wrote:

The altitude depicted for a published route segment of an approach is
safe to fly along any portion of that route segment. Rate of descent
is not an issue. Check the TERPS guidance.

In particular check Paragraph 289 of the TERPs "guidance."

Bits and pieces on one part of the FAA web site. The only reliable electronic
source is Summit's Aviation Reference Library.

Paul Lynch wrote:

Is the TERPS manual available online?

wrote in message ...


Joe wrote:

The altitude depicted for a published route segment of an approach is
safe to fly along any portion of that route segment. Rate of descent
is not an issue. Check the TERPS guidance.

In particular check Paragraph 289 of the TERPs "guidance."