Garmin Behind the Curve on WAAS GPS VNAV Approaches

Richard Kaplan wrote:

> "Scott Moore" <samiam@moorecad.com> wrote in message
> news:3F150F17.3BF25625@moorecad.com...
> > 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
news:dsjahvoedrodik7bb5sp046krpa3ivf7m2@...
> 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, joe@obilivan.net wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Richard Kaplan wrote:
> >
> >> "Scott Moore" <samiam@moorecad.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3F150F17.3BF25625@moorecad.com...
> >> > 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" <rapopor1@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bf3ll7$ljb$1@slb3.atl.mindspring.net...
> 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.

"Mike Rapoport" <rapopor1@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:bf3mak$tk8$1@slb1.atl.mindspring.net...
> 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" <rkaplan@flyimc.com> 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.

Leland Vandervort wrote:
>
> 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

Who cares what Europe does. DME is entirely redundant to GPS.

--
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.....

"Richard Kaplan" <rkaplan@flyimc.com> wrote in message
news:%imRa.2066$7O.439@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
>
>
> "Tarver Engineering" <jtarver@sti.net> wrote in message
> news:3f156944@news.sti.net...
>
> > head. UPS was on the phone before the smoke break ended. WAAS alone
could
> > not add any new services to existing GPS.
>
> So are you saying that the CNX-80 is approved or will be approved to fly
> approaches which the Garmin 530 never will be able to fly?

Garmin has already announced plans to upgrade the 530. Garmin has also
announced plans to make the 530 a fully TAWS compliant display, as well. I
know some repair stations that are just barely getting by on TAWS
installations and they hope Garmin takes a long time to make the release.

> And are you saying in fact that the Garmin 530 will never be approved to
fly
> VNAV, LPV, PV, or other approaches with lower minimums than current GPS
> approaches?

No. I am writing that Garmin is now going to have to play catch up.

John P. tarver, MS/PE

"Richard Kaplan" <rkaplan@flyimc.com> wrote in message
news:08e5297f8b04a12ba98b54fe2071e26e@TeraNews...
>
> "Tarver Engineering" <jtarver@sti.net> wrote in message
> news:3f1629f8@news.sti.net...
>
> > No. I am writing that Garmin is now going to have to play catch up.
>
> Then what did you mean when you said "WAAS alone could not add any new
> services to existing GPS"?

The use of a data base and pressure altitude are being used to pump the
probabilities for the UPS box.