GPS Models -- Pros and Cons

"Nosegear" wrote:
Thanks, you're right. Does that also go for built-in aviation
GPS's/Moving
Maps? I assume there is some sort of certification there?

Yes. There are various levels of certification for units installed in
certified aircraft.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Nosegear wrote:

Also, with properly designed software the pen interface need not be a
problem: you do the miniscule work when safely on the ground, and all
other functions are easily activated by using your finger on the touch-
screen. When you'd use PocketFMS, you can do the pre-flight part on your
home PC and transfer everything to your iPAQ when finished.

Um, I dunno about you, but it's not unknown for us to wind up
diverting enroute due to weather. Usually under conditions
which make it both highly desireable to navigate accurately,
and highly difficult to use the pen interface on a Palm (which
one of us is usually doing, to check CBAV).

ie, we may start out doing the "miniscule" work safely on the
ground but it can't be counted on to end there.

I don't know how PocketFMS works: if it has the equivalent of
a red "nearest" button which will let you toggle quickly through
the 20 nearest airports or navaids, that'd suffice for most situations
I can think of.

Cheers,
Sydney

Usually under conditions
which make it both highly desireable to navigate accurately,
and highly difficult to use the pen interface on a Palm (which
one of us is usually doing, to check CBAV).

What is CBAV?

On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 21:39:54 +0000, Jay Honeck wrote:

I've been leaning towards a Garmin 196 to replace our ailing Lowrance Airmap
300. However, now that Garmin has announced they are no longer going to
support the Garmin 90, it appears that they are no better at support than
Lowrance -- who recently "orphaned" my Airmap from all technical support.
(This occurred right before it started acting flaky, naturally.)


I would avoid the non-dedicated GPS. I have a Garmin 195 and the
AnywhereMap. I put the AnywhereMap back in the box after a few hours. It
is hard to be dedicated controls and the convenience of the 195.

jerry

Having seen the iPaq (who comes up with these weird spellings, anyway) and
most of the GPS units I would say that the iPaq is a pretty good deal. The
screen is brighter than that on most GPS units. The wire clutter is no worse
than in any handheld GPS and in some cases actually better. You do not have
to use the pen. The actual downside is that it is slower than the newer
handhelds.

The actual downside is that it is slower than the newer
handhelds.

Could you expand on that a bit? Slower in what way?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:cwVSa.112586$ye4.83381@sccrnsc01...
| The actual downside is that it is slower than the newer
| handhelds.
|
| Could you expand on that a bit? Slower in what way?
| --

It appears to me (and this is a subjective observation) that the iPaq
updates its screen more slowly than a handheld GPS. Of course, this can be
dependent on the particular model of iPaq, too.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message


It appears to me (and this is a subjective observation) that the iPaq
updates its screen more slowly than a handheld GPS. Of course, this
can be dependent on the particular model of iPaq, too.

....and the software and how many other apps are currently running.

My experience is that the AnywhereMap software will paint the screen very
quickly once a second with the Sentinel GPS. I also try to keep it as the
only software running at the time to help ensure it has all the RAM it needs
(although my iPAQ has far more than necessary).

With all that said, a dedicated GPS unit has only one function so they can
tweak the hell out of it to do that one function very well.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/tknoFlyer
__________

Jay,

A Garmin 295 lives on my copilot yoke. I like it quite a bit - use it for
backup, mainly, and for landmark identification once in awhile.

Once upon a time it was the ONLY GPS in my airplane. (Now I have an
IFR-certified GPS.) I used it a lot. Would I have found the AnywhereMap nearly
as functional? In a word, no. Excusing the wire mess and the fact that it's a
fragile, non-aviation device for use in a pretty rugged environment, the real
problem is interfacing with the damn thing. I have a cheap-o Palm Pilot VIIx
that I've written about on the newsgroups a few times, and I love it. I've used
it for a year now and have told everyone and their brother how cost-effective it
is to get in-cockpit weather with CBAV. But I only have to use it to get
weather images and such, so I tap in a few characters, sit the unit on the
glareshield and wait a moment to retrieve the data I want. Using an iPaq for
regular GPS usage - no way - or, I'd rather not, anyway. The AnywhereMap WX has
such attractive features. I just wish they'd build it all into a portable box
designed to work in the airplane - voila, an aviation GPS with weather
detection built in. If they made it, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. For GPS alone,
I really don't see the advantage of the AnywhereMap system. I evaluate aviation
products for use in an aviation environment, and while getting the extra
features of an iPaq for non-aviation tasks is nice, losing the robustness of the
built-like-a-tank Garmins is a poor tradeoff in my opinion.

Another significant downside to the interface problem is your head-down time.
The amount you spend looking inside with the PDA vs. the GPS will be greater.

Best,

Ryan



Jay Honeck wrote:

I've been leaning towards a Garmin 196 to replace our ailing Lowrance Airmap
300. However, now that Garmin has announced they are no longer going to
support the Garmin 90, it appears that they are no better at support than
Lowrance -- who recently "orphaned" my Airmap from all technical support.
(This occurred right before it started acting flaky, naturally.)

So, I'm now thinking about one of these Compaq Ipaq/GPS combinations. One
of our guests at the inn gave me a 15 minute "tour" of his, and I was fairly
impressed with:

- The color screen.
- The strength of the software.
- The fact that it just doesn't sit in the plane, but is actually useful
beyond flying.

Apparent downsides we

- The screen didn't look bright enough in direct sunlight
- The "pen" interface seemed like a tough thing to handle, especially in
turbulence.
- The clutter of wires in the cockpit sounds like a mess.

What says the group? Anyone out there care to comment on the various
strengths and weaknesses? I've only got about ten days left to make up my
mind!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Ryan Ferguson" wrote in message


Another significant downside to the interface problem is your
head-down time. The amount you spend looking inside with the PDA vs.
the GPS will be greater.

Not necessarily.

Using just the moving map display on both units, for example, will not show
a difference in head-down time.

Depending on the type of activity you're doing, either unit can cause more
head-down time than the other.

The fact remains that the only way to truly evaluate the difference is to
take a flight with both units.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/tknoFlyer
__________