Portabler GPS for Private Flying in CESSNA

[dawson67]

I was wondering on the best type of Portable GPS for Private Flying. What are the opinions on the GPS AVMAP 495. Especially using coordinates for flying to farm strips.:D

[Katamarino]

I use a 296, have had it in and out of a few Cessnas, and the yoke mount is perfect. You can easily enter coordinates as a waypoint to get to any farm strip you might like - I love mine! It was my backup unit for a 5 week flying/camping trip across America too (the 172SP had a panel mounted moving map), and I have no complaints at all.

[flybymike]

It makes a refreshing change to hear from someone who uses a back up GPS to another primary GPS, rather than those who think it should be a back up to a mark one eyeball and stopwatch, (which should be the last port of call..)

[dawson67]

Thanks for that. Is the 296 made by the same manurfacturer as the Gps map 495?

[Sunfish]

Just remember the name Garmin. Buy a Garmin 296. Buy a Garmin Fortrex 201 as a backup.

The aircraft I usually do long distance stuff in has a TSO'd Garmin GNS 430 with all the bells and whistles built in, but I usually put the Fortrex 201 on the yoke and have it programmed to the same destination as a backup. Then there is an old Garmin Etrex with spare batteries in my flight bag.

I cross check everything with everything else and mark my position on the map every ten minutes.

P.S. Don't EVER pass up an opportunity to nail your exact position. The GNS 430 has RAIM built in, but the consumer level stuff hasn't, and with my usual luck they always stop seeing sufficient satellites at a critical time.

P.S. On my first outback trip in a C172, the Fortrex 201 guided me most of the way....but these days I like something with a good autopilot.

P.P.S. Make sure that what you get can be moved around easily if you are in a 172 or suchlike. Unless you have a remote mount aerial that you can stick up high on the windscreen, you may need to place your gps on the dash sometimes so it can "see" the satellites around the wing.

[Mike Cross]

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=156

I use the 196 and have done for a few years. I'm very happy with it and I fly into strips. I have rigged a panel mount in the Luscombe and have a power cable and use the remote antenna that came with it sucker-mounted to the roof window. I use Navbox Proplan for planning and upload the route into the 196 in seconds. No doubt you'll have something in Oz that will do a similar job.

[dublinpilot]

I use (and help a little bit with the development of) PocketFMS (http://www.pocketfms.com).

It runs on a PDA, many modern car sat nav's, or a tablet PC.

It also runs on your pc, meaning easy and simply flight planning (including weather and radar in Australia) on your PC, and quick and simple transfer of your plans to your mobile device (PDA or car sat nav).

It will even automatically create NAIPS notification file (.dtl) for Australian users, making submission of flight plans electronically a sinch.

Some of the modern car sat nav's have excellent screens, and can be much better in sunlight than PDA's. I use a Mio 320B and it's perfect in sunlight. It also makes a very portable system when you rent aircraft.

The system is regularly updated, so you don't need to update your hardware to get new features.

The big downside I suppose is that you can't point at it and say "I'd like one of those please." You need to buy the hardware yourself, and then buy PocketFMS, which involves a little research into hardware on your behalf. There is plenty of help for this though on the PocketFMS forums.

There is a free 30 day trial available on the website Home of the PocketFMS Foundation. (http://www.pocketfms.com)

dp

[172driver]

P.S. Don't EVER pass up an opportunity to nail your exact position. The GNS 430 has RAIM built in, but the consumer level stuff hasn't, and with my usual luck they always stop seeing sufficient satellites at a critical time.

Get an external antenna. I use a Garmin 96 that's already got me around Europe and Africa. Initially bought it as a backup to the panel-mounted units (I fly a variety of rentals that have everything from 430s down to Pilots IIIs built in), but am extremely happy with it. With the external antenna (which you mount as far forward on the dash as you can), I've never been out of satellite coverage. This includes southern Africa.



P.P.S. Make sure that what you get can be moved around easily if you are in a 172 or suchlike. Unless you have a remote mount aerial that you can stick up high on the windscreen, you may need to place your gps on the dash sometimes so it can "see" the satellites around the wing.

Correct, but again a remote antenna solves this issue.

PS: by 'external' I am referring to an antenna plugged into the unit, but mounted somewhere inside the a/c, not one mounted to the outside of the a/c.

[Katamarino]

It makes a refreshing change to hear from someone who uses a back up GPS to another primary GPS, rather than those who think it should be a back up to a mark one eyeball and stopwatch, (which should be the last port of call..)

In reply to what I assume was a very sarcastic post, every flight was obviously planned and flown using a paper chart, DI, and watch - just the same as every cross country I've ever flown. However, as a low hour PPL who'd only ever flown around Florida and the UK, I decided that when tackling the deserts of Arizona and Nevada, and the mountains of the Rockies and California, I'd be very happy to have all the navigational backup I could get my hands on... :rolleyes:

[flybymike]

It was not at all intended as a sarcastic post. Deadly earnest. You are far safer relying on a GPS than a chart, stopwatch and eyeball. For some strange reason people have become accustomed to getting all defensive about using GPS, saying that they only ever use it as a back up to "conventional navigation," whereas in this day and age it should be the primary source of Nav info.

[172driver]

whereas in this day and age it should be the primary source of Nav info.

hear, hear ! :ok::D

[Katamarino]

In that case - fair enough! I am of the 'use everything available, and make sure it all agrees', school of flying :)

[Genghis the Engineer]

To be honest, I think that even the CAA nowadays have no problem with GPS as primary navigation.

It's using it for sole navigation that worries them, and rightly so.

G

[flybymike]

Primary Source GPS.
Back up source another GPS.
back up to back up source, radio Nav.
Back up to back up to back up, Chart and stopwatch.
If all else fails , ask the wife....

[JBGA]

It was not at all intended as a sarcastic post. Deadly earnest. You are far safer relying on a GPS than a chart, stopwatch and eyeball. For some strange reason people have become accustomed to getting all defensive about using GPS, saying that they only ever use it as a back up to "conventional navigation," whereas in this day and age it should be the primary source of Nav info.

I disagree wholeheartedy (and I'm not one of those crusty old fellows who we all know and love but has a lack appreciation for modern technology). Your GPS is only as good as the data on it and believe me, there are errors aplenty. That's assuming the database is up to date (The vast majority aren't) and the owner has read all the alerts from the supplier.

Go to the airprox board and find the report about the aircraft that very nearly collided with a glider on a winch launch. The pilot had flown around happily for hours carefully avoiding all the airspace using the highly accurate and reliable position he was getting on his moving map display but the winch launching site hadn't been added to his database yet.

And I suppose that when you read the notams before flying you add the location and times of the Red Arrows displays and RA(T)'s to your database so you are aware of them whilst flying along looking at your GPS display?

[IO540]

To be honest, I think that even the CAA nowadays have no problem with GPS as primary navigation.

It's using it for sole navigation that worries them, and rightly so.Not sure why, Genghis.

Firstly, in BRNAV airspace (FL095+ is most of Europe) the only way to navigate is using a GPS. Not only is a GPS the only possible means of compliance with BRNAV requirements (INS being the other but not applicable for GA) but it is also the only practical way given that ATC treat all waypoints as RNAV waypoints and don't care if some of them are VORs or whatever. One could argue these waypoints could be navigated to using a KNS80 but you often get a DCT to some waypoint 200nm away and a KNS80 won't work because it still needs to be within reception of a real VOR/DME. So... a GPS, used solely, is the only practical way to do this, and the CAA implicitly fully supports this, as does every other European authority. RNAV is the way the world has gone.

In principle one could say that one still has the traditional backup (VORs or just ask ATC for vectors) but in reality the system is totally dependent on RNAV capability and would not function without it.

Secondly, all the traditionalists seem to be quite happy when somebody says they navigate solely using dead reckoning (map, stopwatch, compass) with no fallback. This is what is taught in the PPL, after all. Sole DR with no backup. There are many ways to c*ock this up. Even if GPS was 90% reliable it would still be better. In reality it is perhaps 99.99% reliable.

Unfortunately nobody in the CAA is going to go on record supporting sole use of GPS because the CAA also presides over the PPL syllabus, the teaching of which would collapse if this was actually adopted.

Go to the airprox board and find the report about the aircraft that very nearly collided with a glider on a winch launch. The pilot had flown around happily for hours carefully avoiding all the airspace using the highly accurate and reliable position he was getting on his moving map display but the winch launching site hadn't been added to his database yet.

JBGA - what airspace class was this in?? I think you will find all the traffic was in Class G.

Babies and bathwater come to mind.

[dublinpilot]

I suspect GtE's comments were probably directed at portable systems. They can be subject to problems that certificated systems aren't, such as poor antenna placement, lack of external power sources, or as is commonly the case in VFR systems-out of date databases(IFR ones are usually kept uptodate).

Not so much an equipment problem, but a user one, but none the less a reasonable concern if it's your only means of navigation.

[flybymike]

JBGA, the incidents you quote about Glider winch launches, Red Arrow RATs etc are pilot errors, not GPS errors. GPS as a primary source of Nav from A To B will work quite normally regardless of airspace and database updates. Plan the route on GPS, run it in sim mode to check your navigation planning, and then use an up to date chart and Notams to avoid RATs and anything else not in the database. I certainly don't advocate blind unplanned reliance on out of date GPS databases.

[172driver]

the incidents you quote about Glider winch launches, Red Arrow RATs etc are pilot errors, not GPS errors.

Exactly.
Not updating GPS database = pilot error
Not checking NOTAMS = pilot error
Not ensuring proper satellite reception (by using external antenna) = pilot error
Not having any backup = pilot error

None of the above can be attributed to a GPS unit. It's the user = pilot.

[JBGA]

In the incident I referred to, the GPS was receiving a good signal, the database was up to date, there was no reason to bring a backup in to service and no suggestion that the notams had not been checked. Everything was working properly, as you would expect from a well maintained G1000 in a brand new SR22.
The problem occured because the pilot was navigating using the moving map display of his GPS but the map was missing a vital piece of information due to a defficiency in it's database. The CAA chart showed all the information but was folded up in his flight bag - presumably because he was following the logic that he would only need to use it if all else fails.

Look, I am not anti-GPS. I use three of the darn things when I fly (One for the logger, one is a basic 12XL with just a GOTO function and one is a PDA with full moving map display). GPS is second to none for determining your current position, true direction and true speed and I agree, much more reliable and accurate than a chart and mk1 eyeball. Navigating (i.e. finding your way) in my opinion can only be done if accurate up-to-date information is available and this is where GPS falls down. Apart from the fact that there are frequent database errors, a GPS moving map in most cases cannot be annotated with supplimentary information such as temporary airspace restrictions and notam'ed activities. Therefore, I believe the safest way to navigate is with a CAA chart, annotated with relevant supplimentary information and a GPS to assist with detrmining current position, direction and speed.

[JBGA]

The G1000 uses the same Jeppesen database* as can be found in all Garmin GPS units - although I agree the data that is actually displayed can be selectable depending on intended use. But this only goes to further support my point. How many people who are using a GPS map display to navigate by can be sure that it is displaying all of the available information and not just the information it thinks you need to see?

*The Jeppesen database includes the most critical information such as controlled airspace, atz's, danger areas etc. but not all of the additional information found on CAA charts such as disused airfields, wire launching sites, tethered balloons etc.

[dublinpilot]

Glider sites throughout the UK & Ireland are shown in PocketFMS, which I've mentioned above.

The real key here is knowing and understanding your equipment. You need to know it's strengths and it's weaknesses. You can't assume it's got certain information in it's database, if you haven't checked!

The only safe way is to assume that it doesn't, until you've checked.

In fairness, most pilots will plan their flights on a paper chart, then program it into the GPS. This should show up and discrepencies very quickly. It's the planning that I find I use my chart for most, not in flight work.

dp

[flybymike]

I think I am right in saying that the 296 does not include UK VRPs although these are available for download from a certain unofficial but well respected website.
I thinkthat the 496 and 495 do however include UK VRPs.

[IO540]

JBGA

The issue you highlight is indeed real but the discussion is IMHO more around "just how much of a brain is a pilot supposed to have" rather than around "should every 'aviation' GPS show everything the printed chart shows.

I don't think the answer is clear...

The problem is that PPL training is still firmly stuck in WW1, with some concessions to WW2, and pilots have never seen anything other than the printed chart, which naturally they use in conjunction with a CAA approved stopwatch and a CAA approved compass and a CAA approved pencil. And "GPS" is a 3-letter word.

Then, if some new pilot does something very out of the ordinary (i.e. doesn't chuck flying in for good immediately after getting his PPL) and is a bit noo nosey for his own good and gets involved with a few subversive characters (GPS users who dared walk within 1000ft horizontally of a flying school), he could well end up flying with a GPS, without realising that the base map on it (which comes from that wonderful company called Jeppesen whose monopolistic behaviour makes 1990s British Airways look like Dr Barnardos) doesn't contain everything which the good olde CAA approved printed chart contained.

One could argue that he had a reasonable expectation of seeing the CAA "printed chart" on his GPS (and technically this can be achieved albeit at some cost - I fly UK VFR with a 7" tablet computer running the CAA charts) but actually I would blame the PPL training establishment for shunning GPS for so many years.

And I think the pilot should have enough intelligence to realise the base map on the GPS is little more than a very bare collection of shapes which need to be regularly referenced to the printed chart on his lap.

Until the CAA (and that other obscene monopoly Ordnance Survey, whose taxpayer-funded terrain data the CAA uses) relax their commercial grip on the electronic data, only the most expensive GPS solution will run the real VFR charts - for any country in Europe because all the European CAAs are playing the same game.

And panel mount manufacturers (Garmin) are in bed with Jeppesen so they wouldn't offer a proper VFR moving map anyway.

Also the VFR charts available electronically are just images. They thus cannot be rotated "track up" for example, and there is no "drill-down" i.e. clicking on an airport pulls up its details. The GPS databases are layered so you can do that and Jeppesen have a monopoly on this. But the national CAAs could easily break this monopoly if they released their data in database form - which they won't because they are financially in bed with Jeppesen too.

[flybymike]

I personally think there is much to be said for keeping the base map on the GPS fairly simple and straightforward with just the basic route, airfields waypoints, VRPs, obstacles and airspace boundaries. I find the actual CAA chart representations too potentially confusing and with too much unecessary information for use in flight on the GPS screen, and prefer to use the chart for preliminary planning and then the GPS for the purely navigational function rather than as an information source in its own right.

[JBGA]

IO540 - I couldn't agree more (Although I can say for certain that Jeppesen definately is not in bed with the CAA's. In fact, I'd go as far as to say the locks have been changed and their clothes ripped up and left in the front garden)

I did try using Memory-map on a PDA with a CAA 1/2 million chart once. The screen was too small to be usable but it did make it very easy to read my position and direction across to the paper chart on my lap.

[IO540]

JBGA - yes, none of the printed VFR charts run well on a moving map GPS unless you have a decent size screen - big enough to enable you to see the airspace class and vertical extent labels.

As regards Jepp, well one never knows who they pay money to. The Australian CAA sued Jepp for republishing their data, and the case was settled out of court. Jepp have not ceased publishing the data (had they done so this would have grounded airlines flying in and out of Australia) so one has to assume they cut a deal with the Australian CAA where they pay them some money.

I have no reason to think that Jepp pay money to the UK CAA but this is a much wider thing than just the UK and anybody doing aviation mapping has to do an international package. Jepp do have a lot of clout with the data providers - why do you think Eurocontrol's in-house airways route generation tool has still not been released openly to pilots, despite promises to do so 3 years ago.

Unfortunately everybody is treating charts as a profit centre, enabling electronic versions to be marketed in a very limited way by 3rd parties, and then they moan about CAS busts.

[atb1943]

IO540

Though I know you better, and am now living in blissful retirement I feel I have to take you to task for having slipped back into your bash-Jeppesen ways of several few years ago (which I had hoped had changed for the better after we met at the London Air Show...).:=

What please is their 'monopolistic behaviour'? Is it not rather the case that their involvement in aviation in the last 75 years (coming up 2009) has made them market leader rather than monopolist and their products more of a boon to aviation than a threat?

I can state unequivocally that Jepp are not in bed with anybody, that negotiations with OEMs are tough, and that relationships with the world's CAAs are maintained with great respect and diligence.

It is not unusual for authorities to seek their advice and assistance (a case in point was the establishment of POGO procedures in the wake of CDG's opening), and I know for a fact that many rely on Jepp's checks and double checks of published material to ensure that the end result is correct. Publishing AIPs, creating IFR procedures also point to a need for their skills.

Certain OEMs have also been known to first create products and then come running to Jepps for inclusion of data.

When they came up for grabs following the LA Times' acquisition by the Chicago Tribune, Boeing would have paid anything to acquire them, recognizing the expertise they desired for future flightdecks. The new ownership has only been good for aviation in general, and Boeing have made possible what the newspaper in the past may have baulked at funding.

I do appreciate where you are coming from, that all is not perfect, and I admire your own expertise in things IT and aeronautical. However I had to write, and hope you accept my response in the spirit it is meant.:D

That having been said (with apologies to all for diverting from the original theme), I recently visited Budapest by way of Croatia, Turkey and Greece in an Arrow IV with the help of a Garmin 430, plus an old 195 that was used as a backup (obviously outdated, but nevertheless a great help). It does create more work in flight, but while my pilot was using them he was happy to accept my white-knuckle efforts, or those of Mr. Autopilot, when yours truly started losing concentration!

All the necessary charts were on hand since we were VFR but along regular airways, so there was plenty to fall back on, and my friend is IFR-rated too. The leg from Pula to Dubrovnik was undoubtedly the most pleasant, though the landscape in Turkey is also outstanding. The thunderstorms we encountered around Belgrade on the Kos-Budapest (Budaoers) leg were daunting and I was relieved when the hail stopped rattling and the ice departed the various surfaces!:ooh:

A great trip all in all, much was seen, many hundreds of photos shot, and we even enjoyed a forced bathing holiday when Athens 'asked' us to land in Kos to get our by then dud (new) transponder mended!

I'd do it all again tomorrow.:ok:

I hope you are well.

vbrgds
atb

[IO540]

Hello ATB :)

I am glad to see you are on form and enjoying your retirement :)

One day we must fly together. Then you will be able to see for yourself how many separately funded sets of Jepp data I am flying with ;)

I do think Jepp have a monopoly. That much is pretty obvious. Do they abuse it? That's impossible to answer because they have clearly set their pricing for corporate / commercial operators and have no way to reduce the price (or to produce a market-differentiated subset which could be sold cheaper) for GA users while still delivering something useful.

There is ample evidence that the national CAAs, and Eurocontrol with their routing tools, do work closely with Jeppesen. Again, the beneficiary are the big boys.

Look at how much cheaper Jepp data is for the USA. The cost, per airport say, is a fraction of what it is in Europe. But there is as much work because Jepp re-draft all their plates. I would suggest this difference is because so many U.S. pilots fly with the free plates. Most European free plates (EAD) are barely usable, and when the CAA or whatever are asked why didn't they draw up their plates so they are directly usable in the cockpit, the reply is that they are not in the business of competing with commercial data providers...

[EGBM]

Another vote for the 196/296/496 Garmin GPS family. Mine is mounted on the glareshield using a RAM Mount device and that saviour of mankind, velcro. It is extremely secure and out of the way of the instruments and doesn't interfere with forward vis. This solution was arrived at after trying yoke mounts and other options which were not as suitable, personally.

Is the GPS my prime means of nav? Hmm, I think I look at it in combination with the Mk 1 eyeball and VOR radials but when it comes to locating a peskily well disguised grass aerodrome it tends to make its way further up the priority list!

[bigfoot01]

Well, I have really struggled to get on with my 296. I have for some time used a Garmin 60CX. This offers you the ability to set up a track and then measure your deviation from it (rather lack a VOR readout). It is much simpler than the 296 and doesn't have a built in database. But I programme my way points in from Memory Map. This has been fine, but I have always fancied having a finger on the chart readout. In the early days, I dabbled with Ipaq's and associated gps's, but didn't get on very well, as they needed charging or would crash etc. This thread encouraged me to revisit this. I have just picked up a ipaq RX5935 travel companion from ebay. This has a built in Sirf Star III GPS and works a treat. I am going to use this for my finger on the map and a backup from the 60cx. The battery life is excellent. Apart from the complexity of the 296 (which is a problem of me!) I am also concerned about the old fashioned gps receiver in all of the garmin aviation range. They do need an external aerial and I have had problems even then. Having a manual database does input another increased risk of error, but I have to say I have never had a problem and I always do my manual planning also, although when everything is running well, i will tend to look at my gps first and occassionally mark my position/time on the chart rather than following DI, watch etc. Probably makes me a bad person - but there you go! I am well chuffed now that memory map prices are more reasonable and am awaiting the new Northern Chart...

[BristolScout]

Don't be too hard on the PPL navigation syllabus. Apart from having to comply with ICAO Annex 1, there is a method in the seemingly luddite approach to teaching with map and whizz-wheel in that it demonstrates in an easily assimilated form the basic triangle of velocities. With the best will in the world, this appreciation won't be there for a pilot trained solely on electronics. About 15 years ago I had a modest part to play in the approval of GPS for aviation use and I lectured on it around the country. I would finish my spiel with the following, which found its way into Flight International and I believe the thrust is still true:

'GPS is a fine navigational aid but the best navigation system you or I will ever find is the one fitted, so very ergonomically, between our ears.'

[BackPacker]

Just to add a different setup...

My primary GPS (note - not my primary means of navigation) is a cheapo Garmin eTrex Euro. It's about eight years old now and was, at that time, the only reasonably priced, rugged GPS around. It can be had today for about 100-130 euros.

Add to this a data cable (included by default now with the more expensive eTrex-es) and a laptop with OziExplorer. Add a scanner which I used to scan the Jeppessen VFR charts, or any other paper chart you use to do flight planning on. OziExplorer works with the most common bitmap formats (BMP and JPG at least) and allows you to easily calibrate the maps and add them to its database. The limit here is the size of your scanner - each scan becomes a separate map which needs to be calibrated separately. Although you could "stitch" them together, I guess, and calibrate the result. In any case, that's something you do once on a rainy Sunday afternoon.

I plan my flight PPL-style, on the map. Then turn on the laptop, fire up OziExplorer, select the proper scanned map, click to add the waypoints, combine them in a route, then upload this into the Garmin. Also use OziExplorer to check my distance/heading calculations. Sounds complicated but takes less than a minute.

The eTrex then gets stuck somewhere in the cockpit with a cheap swivel head on a suction cup, and the paper chart is held next to it and functions as the primary navigation reference. Works perfectly fine.

Since I had everything already before learning to fly, except for the swivel head thingy, the total cost worked out to about 10 euros. The Garmin by the way has a battery life, even on rechargeables, well exceeding plane/bladder endurance and I always have a pack of spare AAs in my flightbag anyway. So I don't even need to mess with cables to hook it up to the cigarette lighter socket - which in some of our planes is marked "ground use only" in any case.

As I fly a variety of planes, with a variety of navigational equipment (from bare minimum to dual GNS430+ADF), both yokes and stick, I found this setup to be the most versatile.