REFLECTOR: Dream Panel - Flight Management Systems

Thu Mar 2 09:53:05 CST 2006

Terry,

many thanks for your excellent suggestions.  I've worked both sides of 
the radar screen and can relate to your concern over flying single pilot 
IFR into congested airspace.

The IFR that is flown in my friends T210, by him, me and another relief 
pilot is mostly just getting in or out of an airport with VFR like 
flying in between.  We try to stay away from hard en route  IFR as doing 
that in the mountain west can be extremely dicey in a small plane when 
you mix in embedded Tstorms and widespread icing.

We do fly into ABQ, PHX, LAS, DEN quite a bit, but they aren't like 
flying into the LAS basin or SFO bay area as I used to a few years ago, 
where amended routings are the norm.  I agree that handling ATC in 
congested airspace almost requires two people up front that are trained 
in CRM. 

When I was working at OAK center I used to fire off those 15 fix 
reroutes without giving much thought to who I was giving it too. I was 
not a pilot at the time and that is one of the down sides to non-pilot 
controllers. There are down sides to being a pilot controller as well 
which is another story.  I used to grouse quite a bit on break with 
other controllers about those "dinks" and how much of a pain they were.  
I have a bit of a different view of GA now! :-)

thanks again,

Scott

Terry Miles wrote:
> Scott:
> Let me add my two cents, with the caveat that I do not have GA
> experience.  I am still building.  All my flying to date has been
> pushing very heavy metal in and out of major airports, and I know it's
> not the same.  That said, I would encourage your friend not to file /G
> in heavy traffic areas if he plans to use a 6 pack AND then add in the
> likes of a 480 with an MX20.  As Ronnie and Kurt have pointed out, ATC
> is in overload.  I was on the BoD of the Air Line Pilots' Assoc when R.
> Polli took the PATCO controllers out on strike in 1980 over these very
> frustrations and lack of action.  That's why over a period of years they
> got more and more militant.  Little has changed and I can list off
> numerous areas in the country where traffic saturation is dreadful and
> tempers flair both in the cockpit and in the RAPCON...or whatever it's
> called today.     
>
> If you tell ATC you are GPS equipped by filing /G on a flight plan, and
> you then go some place-solo--where they are very busy...they might well
> offer you  clearance alternatives (equally awful) that would be a
> handful to load into a 480, and then load into a VOR/CDI setup...and
> then decide which screen to watch--and which feed to send to your
> autopilot.  As Larry Epstein correctly points out below, the 480 is
> clearly superior to the 530 for IFR features.  The 530 does not know
> SIDs and STARs altho the intersections are available in the 530 data
> base for you to enter one at a time.  If you are forced on to or off of
> a victor airway at an intersection, the 530 does not know those either
> and you must load them one at a time.  With the 480, you can tell it
> "V18 from Atlanta to Charleston" and it will load all the intermediate
> points for you.  The 530 will not do this, nor does it have a holding
> pattern function.  The 480 does.     
>
> Now look at that hypothetical ATL to CHS trip, and ATL Departure starts
> handing out reroutes due to wx or traffic or both.  Your friend will
> then have to defer to his 6-pack or depend on his 480.  (Dig out a Low
> 49 and follow along with me.)  Image hearing this on climb out:  "Can
> you make 10,000 by Conni?"  So you come back right with a "no."  Then it
> says "OK, after CORVI I need you to route V267 to V155 to IRQ and then
> Flight Plan route."  Don't think they would never do this.  That's what
> I thought too...until they see on your radar strip that you are GPS
> equipped and this controller is about the hand you off and either he or
> the next guy just doesn't have the time (or the airspace) to spoon feed
> you with vectors.  To my thinking the 480 is a well thought out data
> entry device with a confirming screen that will show you if you fat
> fingered something on the data entry.  By design it does not have a
> larger map display, where the bigger screen on the 530 does.  The 530 is
> more a VFR point-to-point tool.  (The screen on the 530 is 3/4 inch
> taller and 3/4 inch wider) That's why it's common to see the GNS480/mx20
> together and why the 530 is often seen alone.  It seems to me the double
> entry and the double monitoring of a 480/mx20 AND a 6 pack has a
> redundant element that just adds to workload when it gets busy and auto
> pilots have to be told which one to follow.  
>
> Another aside:  So you know.  I just got done about a month ago,
> examining all this in detail.  I started with the 530.  Since it's
> another $1200 more than the 480 I presumed it was the better box.  I
> changed my order after I read the manuals.  Also I used Stark Avionics.
> They had the best prices I could find, and I was treated very well.  
>
> If your friend is happy w/ his 6-pack, tell him to get a GPSMAP 296 (or
> 396 if he wants wx). When flying into busy airspace tell him to load
> that device with a direct to origin-destination and not to tell ATC he
> is GPS equipped.  I got a 296 for $1000, and they keep popping up on
> ebay as guys unload them for the 396.  
>
> I predicated a lot of above on the point you said that he wanted IFR.
> That's a rather broad term.  Traffic saturation will squeeze out/scare
> out GA traffic away from metroplex areas and into the hinterlands  I'll
> be flying a lot of ORD to PHL to BOS general areas, altho not into those
> terminals.  I realize that Atlanta Hartsfield doesn't likely handle a
> lot of GA, and we would instead file to a smaller airport in the area.
> That still does not negate arrival airspace congestion which is only
> getting worse.  If you can help ATC help you get where you're going, it
> will get you better service (sometimes). I'd also, and as a last point,
> have your friend to study the offerings of Grand Rapids Tech, to be sure
> the impact of his decision to retain steam gauges is fully
> understood...esp if he doesn't upgrade his equip all that often.  
>
> Just my two cents
> Terry
> GNS 480, Grand Rapids EFIS w/ WX option.
> XLRG-5
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: reflector-bounces at tvbf.org [mailto:reflector-bounces at tvbf.org] On
> Behalf Of Lawrence J. Epstein,MD
> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 5:47 PM
> To: 'Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list'
> Subject: RE: REFLECTOR: Dream Panel
>
>
> Correction-It will control many transponders. We don't have the GTX330,
> so I am not sure if it will display the traffic info.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: reflector-bounces at tvbf.org [mailto:reflector-bounces at tvbf.org] On
> Behalf Of Lawrence J. Epstein,MD
> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 5:42 PM
> To: 'Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list'
> Subject: RE: REFLECTOR: Dream Panel
>
> Anyone out there considering the Garmin 430/530 should re-consider and
> look at the Garmin (480) CNX-80.  This is the better unit and is already
> WAAS certified and operational. I currently fly 1 of these in each of
> the aircraft in my flying club. It is a beautiful unit which is MUCH
> more capable than the 430.  It's menu's are logical. It will control the
> GTX330, including Auto activate/deactivate at any pre-set speed and
> display traffic. I have it connected with GPS-s and our Arrows &
> Bonanza's fly the (IFR) GPS approaches/Holds and routes perfectly.
>
> Larry Epstein,MD
>
> _______________________________________________
> To change your email address, visit
> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>
> Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
> _______________________________________________
> To change your email address, visit http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>
> Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>
>
>
>   