garmin or something else

Kelly wrote:
Thanks for all of the comments and suggestions.


To test I went up in a 496 equipped 172, a hood and another pilot and
simulated a panel is dead and in the soup. I used the 496 Panel page
and was able to get to 500 feet and the right end of the runway with
the shiny side up. I'm sold on the thing. It is critical though to
give the instrument time to average out. Especially airspeed. Don't
chase it.

I'm glad to hear that this worked out. I read a similar account in
Aviation Consumer, and it may have even been with a 396, In that
article, the point was made that the 396 (or 496) was a viable backup
in an emergency situation.

In considering the various options I have to get wx in flight, I
figure I will have to spend a minimum of $1200 or $1300, which at this
range would involve using my laptop along with a wxworx receiver, gps
receiver, and one of the less expensive flight planning/wx software
programs. When I consider this cost, it doesn't make the 396 at $1800
look so bad (or for that matter even the 496 at $2300).

One last thing -- has anyone used a smartphone communicating with a wx
receiver in flight? The approach systems software mentioned by one of
the posters has that option, as does Anywhere Map.

Kelly

Just for the record, while I never tried my experiment with a 396 I have
flown with one and there is a MASSIVE difference between the 1hz and 5hz
refreash rate. I doubt I could have flown the aircraft with just the 396
"panel" under the hood.

On Aug 20, 4:47 pm, dave wrote:
I have a garmin 430 in my airplane and I still carry my old garmin 196.
I do want to get weather so I've been thinking about the
flightcheetah 190 or a software based system that I could run on a
palmtop like the Samsung Q1. I like the idea of using the Samsung
because I could also use it for work. Here's some links
approach systems - software only -http://www.approach-systems.com/apic.asp
True Systems - both hardware and software solutionshttp://www.aviationsafety.com/fl_190.htm
Flightprep - software only but apparently they'll package it with
hardware if you wanthttp://www.flightprep.com/rootpage.php?page=HomeEFBSW
Dave
M35

Kelly wrote:
I'm trying to figure out what portable device to buy to provide in-
flight weather, as well as terrain info. Electronic approach plates
and enroute charts, as well as flight planning capability, would also
be a plus, but not essential. I fly a Cessna 172 that is already
equipped with a Garmin 430. I have read about both the Garmin 396 and
496, and I borrowed the 496 to use for a couple of flights. I have
also checked out several EFB-type systems online, such as through
Anywhere Map, Voyager, and Chart Case, which can be used on a laptop
or tablet, or in some cases, a smartphone.

I would be interested to know if anyone has had good luck with either
a laptop or smartphone medium, and what software package was used.
Also, I know how the 396 and 496 differ, but would like to know if you
think the 496 is worth the extra $600. I should also mention that I
like the "6-pack" panel page on the Garmins as a potential backup in
the event of vacuum pump or electrical failure, and wonder how much
difference the faster refresh rate on the 496 makes for this page. I
guess I am leaning toward a Garmin at this point, but would first like
to hear some other comments on these issues.

Thanks in advance.
Kelly

On Aug 20, 4:47 pm, dave wrote:
I have a garmin 430 in my airplane and I still carry my old garmin 196.
I do want to get weather so I've been thinking about the
flightcheetah 190 or a software based system that I could run on a
palmtop like the Samsung Q1. I like the idea of using the Samsung
because I could also use it for work. Here's some links
approach systems - software only -http://www.approach-systems.com/apic.asp
True Systems - both hardware and software solutionshttp://www.aviationsafety.com/fl_190.htm
Flightprep - software only but apparently they'll package it with
hardware if you wanthttp://www.flightprep.com/rootpage.php?page=HomeEFBSW
Dave
M35

Has anyone used the software from Approach Systems? I had not run
across this before Dave mentioned it, but it looks pretty good and has
an option for free 30-day trial. I was particularly intrigued by the
attitude indicator page and wonder how well that works. With a Pocket
PC, the Approach Systems software would seem to be similar in many
respects (but cheaper) to the Anywhere Map software.

Kelly

Joining the discussion late and not sure who wrote:
I should also mention that I
like the "6-pack" panel page on the Garmins as a potential backup in
the event of vacuum pump or electrical failure, and wonder how much
difference the faster refresh rate on the 496 makes for this page. I
guess I am leaning toward a Garmin at this point, but would first like
to hear some other comments on these issues.

In regard only to the comment above about the 6-pack instrument page, I
have a tandem airplane with two Garmin 296's (one in front, one in
back). Since there are no instruments in back, that 6-pack instrument
page not only serves as the dual backup you mentioned above, it also
gives the back-seat pilot/passenger access to info he/she can't see on
the panel itself over the shoulders of the front-seat pilot/passenger.
These little hand-helds are worth their weight in gold, IMO.

Kelly wrote:

Has anyone used the software from Approach Systems? I had not run
across this before Dave mentioned it, but it looks pretty good and has
an option for free 30-day trial. I was particularly intrigued by the
attitude indicator page and wonder how well that works. With a Pocket
PC, the Approach Systems software would seem to be similar in many
respects (but cheaper) to the Anywhere Map software.

Kelly


Kelly,
Unfortunately I have not tried any of the three that I have suggested.
I never heard about approach systems until I bought my bonanza. The
guy I bought it from is one of the owners. The panel shot in the
brochure is my airplane. I think he was more of an investor and test
pilot of the product than a designer/programmer.

One other pricing issue - database updates. According to the flight
cheetah website Garmin costs about $1000/year vs. $200/year. That's a
significant cost. I'd like to go with a software solution and use an
ultra-mobile PC, UMPC, like the samsung q1. I can use the UMPC for
work which makes buying the package more valuable. Dropping $2500 for
a 496 which admittedly is a very good product doesn't make sense if I
can spend the same or less on a software solution and a UMPC that I will
use for several hours/week for other things. If I did go with a
hardware solution I'd pick the flight cheetah 190 over the garmins.

Dave
M35

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 15:47:05 -0400, dave wrote:

If I did go with a hardware solution
I'd pick the flight cheetah 190 over the garmins.

That's the direction in which I'm leaning.

The 496 "panel" is nice. However, the 190 has - at a nontrivial
additional price, admittedly - a real electronic AI.

There's also the VistaNav to consider.

I'm hoping all these products are on the floor at AOPA Expo in a couple of
months. I'll get a chance to see them up close, and probably leave the
show with one or the other.

In no particular order, my thoughts one way or the other a

* Garmin is integrated more tightly than the other solutions;
should therefore be more stable.

* Garmin has no upgrade path; the other products permit upgrades
w/o buying new hardware (at least for a while {8^)

* Screen size; bigger is better

* Unit size; smaller is better

* Garmin has AOPA directory and street mapping; Other solutions
have whatever I choose to load onto the general purpose
computer

* Garmin has option of plugging into GNS-430s in the panels behind
which I fly

* "Panel" w/o pitch information vs. AI w/o VSI (is there anything
else in the Garmin "panel" lacking from the other units?)

- Andrew

I have taken my laptop with me a couple of times for local flights
lately just to see how cramped things might feel. I was also by
myself on these flights, when things are obviously least cramped
otherwise. Well, there appear to be a couple of options for a
standard size laptop -- leave it on the right seat if unoccupied, or
fold down the screen all the way and have it on my lap. I have to say
that having the computer on my lap does feel cramped and somewhat
awkward, and as Jay mentioned, having to look down at the screen seems
less than ideal, particularly if in IMC or turbulence. While the
approach plates display very nicely on a full size screen, I think the
disadvantages may outweigh the advantages.

Like Dave, ideally I would like to find a solution that would serve
more than just one purpose. If I could use the display device in the
plane and for PDA/email/computing functions on the ground, I would
feel more justified in shelling out a nice chunk of change. I looked
at the HP ipaq 5715, which seemed to be a decent pocket PC with built
in GPS for $400. It has a 3.5 inch (diagonal) screen, which is the
same size as the Garmin 396/496. Has anyone used the ipaq in the
cockpit?

Kelly

On Aug 27, 2:19 pm, Bob Moore wrote:
Kelly wrote

Has anyone used the ipaq in the
cockpit?

Yes, I have been using an iPAQ for several years. I have
installed the Anywhere Map software, Pocket FMS, and the
OziExplorer program with scans of the local TACs.

It was cumbersome to use until I obtained a Bluetooth sleeve
for my older iPAQ (3760) and a small Bluetooth GPS receiver
to place on the glareshield. No more loss of signal. I did
purchase a direct Lighter Plug (USB) to iPAQ power cord from eBay
and got rid of the cumbersome power adapter from Anywhere Map.


Bob,

How easy is it to view charts, such as TACs, on the ipaq? Have you
used it for approach plates?

Kelly
The bigest problem remains visibility under bright sunlight
conditions, I would not want it mounted permanently due to
this issue.

Bob Moore

Kelly wrote:


Bob,

How easy is it to view charts, such as TACs, on the ipaq? Have you
used it for approach plates?

Kelly

The ability to use approach plates is a big item to me. That's why I'm
considering something like the samsung Q1.
Dave
M35

"Kelly" wrote

I have to say
that having the computer on my lap does feel cramped and somewhat
awkward, and as Jay mentioned, having to look down at the screen seems
less than ideal, particularly if in IMC or turbulence. While the
approach plates display very nicely on a full size screen, I think the
disadvantages may outweigh the advantages.

If you were building an experimental, it would seem like a possibility
would be to leave a space in the center, possibly below the radio stack, so
that a laptop could have the screen pointed towards you in a near vertical
position, with the keyboard nearly horizontal and between the seats.

It could be almost like a poor man's glass cockpit. g

The only issue would be screen brightness, then, I think.

Would that orientation be bad for looking down too far, in turbulence, in
your opinion?
--
Jim in NC