Garmin Behind the Curve on WAAS GPS VNAV Approaches

"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...
Speaking only for myself, its pretty damm confusing exactly what would be
done with WAAS even if implemented. Garmins' other units that accept

WAAS is now implemented and IFR approved as of the past week.

If a receiver were approved for WAAS approaches, then TODAY you could use
VNAV/LNAV miniums on GPS RNAV approaches instead of LNAV minimums.
Presumably (though I am not certain) a VNAV/LNAV GPS RNAV approach would be
considered a precision approach. UPSAT's CNX80 web page touts the airports
you have access to today with WAAS; yet the version of the POH supplement
posted on their site says in the legal fineprint that precision approaches
are NOT permitted. So I am not certain if you can or cannot fly VNAV/LNAV
GPS approach mininums TODAY on a CNX-80.

What I would like to see from Garmin is a controlled descent option
on non-precision GPS approaches, which would be perfectly legal to
implement right now (because it is inside the "dive and drive"

If you want to do this as a backup to other navigation, you can do this now
with the VNAV function on the Garmin 430/530, albeit not yet with WAAS.

Nonetheless, there is a big question whether this will make sense for an
approach not explicitly designed as a precision approach. Many
non-precision approaches have a missed approach point from which a suitable
straight-in landing cannot be made; so you could well have a controlled
descent to the middle of the field an then in turn have to circle.

--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

Richard Kaplan wrote:

"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...
Speaking only for myself, its pretty damm confusing exactly what would be
done with WAAS even if implemented. Garmins' other units that accept

WAAS is now implemented and IFR approved as of the past week.

If a receiver were approved for WAAS approaches, then TODAY you could use
VNAV/LNAV miniums on GPS RNAV approaches instead of LNAV minimums.
Presumably (though I am not certain) a VNAV/LNAV GPS RNAV approach would be
considered a precision approach. UPSAT's CNX80 web page touts the airports
you have access to today with WAAS; yet the version of the POH supplement
posted on their site says in the legal fineprint that precision approaches
are NOT permitted. So I am not certain if you can or cannot fly VNAV/LNAV
GPS approach mininums TODAY on a CNX-80.

I wouldn't be so certain of that. Today's VNAV minimums are predicated on
IFR-certified Baro VNAV equipment, not WAAS. WAAS approaches have yet to appear
from the FAA

I have a Jeppesen briefing bulletin (DEN 00-A) that states:

LNAV/VNAV must have WAAS equipment approved for precision approach, or
RNP-0.3 system based on GPS or DME/DME, with an IFR approach approved
Baro-VNAV system. It appears that either is suitable for going to
VNAV minimums


On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 05:47:50 -0700, wrote:



Richard Kaplan wrote:

"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...
Speaking only for myself, its pretty damm confusing exactly what would be
done with WAAS even if implemented. Garmins' other units that accept

WAAS is now implemented and IFR approved as of the past week.

If a receiver were approved for WAAS approaches, then TODAY you could use
VNAV/LNAV miniums on GPS RNAV approaches instead of LNAV minimums.
Presumably (though I am not certain) a VNAV/LNAV GPS RNAV approach would be
considered a precision approach. UPSAT's CNX80 web page touts the airports
you have access to today with WAAS; yet the version of the POH supplement
posted on their site says in the legal fineprint that precision approaches
are NOT permitted. So I am not certain if you can or cannot fly VNAV/LNAV
GPS approach mininums TODAY on a CNX-80.

I wouldn't be so certain of that. Today's VNAV minimums are predicated on
IFR-certified Baro VNAV equipment, not WAAS. WAAS approaches have yet to appear
from the FAA

So does the CNX-80 meet the requirement today? Is it "WAAS equipment
approved for precision approach"?

Mike
MU-2


"Lockheed employee" Mississippi@ home.com wrote in message
...
I have a Jeppesen briefing bulletin (DEN 00-A) that states:

LNAV/VNAV must have WAAS equipment approved for precision approach, or
RNP-0.3 system based on GPS or DME/DME, with an IFR approach approved
Baro-VNAV system. It appears that either is suitable for going to
VNAV minimums


On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 05:47:50 -0700, wrote:



Richard Kaplan wrote:

"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...
Speaking only for myself, its pretty damm confusing exactly what
would be
done with WAAS even if implemented. Garmins' other units that accept

WAAS is now implemented and IFR approved as of the past week.

If a receiver were approved for WAAS approaches, then TODAY you could
use
VNAV/LNAV miniums on GPS RNAV approaches instead of LNAV minimums.
Presumably (though I am not certain) a VNAV/LNAV GPS RNAV approach
would be
considered a precision approach. UPSAT's CNX80 web page touts the
airports
you have access to today with WAAS; yet the version of the POH
supplement
posted on their site says in the legal fineprint that precision
approaches
are NOT permitted. So I am not certain if you can or cannot fly
VNAV/LNAV
GPS approach mininums TODAY on a CNX-80.

I wouldn't be so certain of that. Today's VNAV minimums are predicated
on
IFR-certified Baro VNAV equipment, not WAAS. WAAS approaches have yet to
appear
from the FAA

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
...
So does the CNX-80 meet the requirement today? Is it "WAAS equipment
approved for precision approach"?

Why are you asking a sock a technical question, Mike?

Uspat spent their own money to develop the idea of merging pressure altitude
and a subset of the TAWS database and for that they deserve the market. At
least until the other manufacturers catch up.

I don't know if "behind" is the right word. Garmin has had WAAS on numerous
products for a couple of years now. There are valid reasons to try to have
the best product on the market instead of the first product.

Mike
MU-2


"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:6823bf21e87c61799d150096f329071b@TeraNews...
Garmin's website now says they are "committed" to providing WAAS GPS
approach capability for the 400/500 series by the "end of 2004."

UPSAT's site states that their CNX-80 is WAAS approved now but I cannot
find
an explicit statement that it supports WAAS approaches at this point.

Does anyone know for sure if the CNX-80 supports WAAS GPS approaches
*now*?

In any event, can Garmin really be that far behind the curve as to plan
WAAS
only fo rthe "end of 2004"? This seems very much atypical for Garmin and
almost an embarrassment for them.


--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
...
I don't know if "behind" is the right word. Garmin has had WAAS on
numerous
products for a couple of years now. There are valid reasons to try to
have
the best product on the market instead of the first product.

Garmin is behind because Upsat did the sensor merging on their own
initiative. I stood right there and watched the Transport Directorate say
"no" to the idea and FAA's chief scientist start running numbers in his
head. UPS was on the phone before the smoke break ended. WAAS alone could
not add any new services to existing GPS.

John P. Tarver, MS/PE

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:6823bf21e87c61799d150096f329071b@TeraNews...
| Garmin's website now says they are "committed" to providing WAAS GPS
| approach capability for the 400/500 series by the "end of 2004."
|
| UPSAT's site states that their CNX-80 is WAAS approved now but I cannot
find
| an explicit statement that it supports WAAS approaches at this point.
|

UPS told us that the CNX-80 database needs an upgrade before you can do WAAS
approaches and has promised that it has already been release and that we
should get it soon.

My own 5 euro cents:

Garmin missed the boat on one "minor" point with both the GNS430 and
the GNS530... for something that is purportedly a "fully integrated
comm and navigation system" where is the DME? (Required for Airways
certification). GPS derrived distances are not DME, and in Europe are
not acceptable as a substitute. As a result, a VERY nice panel with a
couple of GNS530 is still not airways approved unless there is a DME
(doesn't necessarily have to be slaved), and hence another 1 radio
unit (height) taken up on the panel. If I'm not mistaken, the UPS kit
has both DME and transponder integrated... I personally prefer the
garmin kit though. Could the engineers at Garmin catch up with
everyone else please? /tongue in cheek

Leland
'71 PA28R-200




On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 07:48:57 -0400, John Mireley
wrote:

Richard Kaplan wrote:
Garmin's website now says they are "committed" to providing WAAS GPS
approach capability for the 400/500 series by the "end of 2004."

UPSAT's site states that their CNX-80 is WAAS approved now but I cannot find
an explicit statement that it supports WAAS approaches at this point.

Does anyone know for sure if the CNX-80 supports WAAS GPS approaches *now*?

In any event, can Garmin really be that far behind the curve as to plan WAAS
only fo rthe "end of 2004"? This seems very much atypical for Garmin and
almost an embarrassment for them.



Garmin lobbied the FAA on the final specs for WAAS so their current
processors could meet the spec. They lost. They now have to replace
the processors in order to meet the spec. I think the issue was that
they could get 3 updates per second and the spec was for 5. This is
from my memory of an FAA session at the Great Lakes Aviation Conference
back in January.

This is my understanding too. In order for the box to drive the glideslope
needle, the altitudes have to be in the database. Currently I don't think
that they are..

Mike
MU-2


"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...
Richard Kaplan wrote:

"Scott Moore" wrote in message
...
Speaking only for myself, its pretty damm confusing exactly what would
be
done with WAAS even if implemented. Garmins' other units that accept

WAAS is now implemented and IFR approved as of the past week.

If a receiver were approved for WAAS approaches, then TODAY you could
use
VNAV/LNAV miniums on GPS RNAV approaches instead of LNAV minimums.
Presumably (though I am not certain) a VNAV/LNAV GPS RNAV approach would
be
considered a precision approach. UPSAT's CNX80 web page touts the
airports
you have access to today with WAAS; yet the version of the POH
supplement
posted on their site says in the legal fineprint that precision
approaches
are NOT permitted. So I am not certain if you can or cannot fly
VNAV/LNAV
GPS approach mininums TODAY on a CNX-80.

What I would like to see from Garmin is a controlled descent option
on non-precision GPS approaches, which would be perfectly legal to
implement right now (because it is inside the "dive and drive"

If you want to do this as a backup to other navigation, you can do this
now
with the VNAV function on the Garmin 430/530, albeit not yet with WAAS.

I was talking about driving the glideslope needle. Pretty much by
definition,
WAAS is going to have to drive the needle to be a precision device. On my
430,
the glideslope needle is driven (obviously) by the box, and when Garmin
talks
about "WAAS compatibility" I have to presume that it means ability to
drive
the glideslope from the GPS side. What else would it mean ? We can add
boxes
to make WAAS work ? Anybody could say that.

--
For most men, true happiness can only be achieved with a woman.
Also for most men, true happiness can only be achieved without a woman.
Sharp minds have noted that these two rules tend to conflict.....