What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Garmin's New Handheld

T

todehnal

Well Known Member
I see that Garmin is showing their new Aera 500 series GPS. The 560 is in the same price range as the 496, but has a larger screen and it is a touch screen. Anyone have any more info?

You can see some of the features at Garmin.com. The best way is to do a compare between it and the 496. I like the added privates airports and the IFR routes. We may be saying goodbye to the X95, X96 series soon.

Tom
 
I like the video review on Avwebflash and like the features of the new unit. However, I have a panel mounted 396 in my 9A and am afraid the new unit would not fit in the space I have for the 396.
Time marches on, doesn't it?
 
My big question is will this fit in my X96 Airgizmo? That would be great if it did. Better yet if I don't have to run new wires for it.

No real details on Garmin's site. Maybe they will post some more information later today.
 
Last edited:
touch screen

I have a 496 mounted in an air gizmo's panel mount and also a Bendix King
Av8tor that i let passengers play with. I found that the touch screen while flying is a real PITA. If it is perfectly smooth air, then it is not so bad, but one little bump and your off to a screen you dont want. Then your mind starts getting occupied with the gps insted of the flying airplane. I will not purchase a touch sreen for the airplane again, no matter who the manufacturer is. Like a good friend told me, big bulky clicky knobs and buttons are the best in a airplane for operator use.......I agree with him.
 
I would have hoped that they would have based their first touch screen unit on the marine GPSMAP 600 series unit. The 600 has a bigger screen and a longer battery life. I hope it has TWO separate serial ports, in addition to the XM USB port.

This unit is about the same size as the auto based Nuvi 800 series.

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=267550#post267550

Aera 500 (5.3 x 3.3 x 0.9, screen 3.8 x 2.25, 480x272 pixel, 9.5 oz, 5 hour battery)
cf-lg.jpg


GPS Map 600 (5.9 x 4 x 1.9, screen 4.5 x 2.7, 800x480 pixel, 17.3 oz, 9 hour battery)
cf-lg.jpg
 
I have to go along with Gary on this one. I don't want a touch screen in my airplane. I can't fly that smoothly!
 
C-FAH Q said:
I have a 496 mounted in an air gizmo's panel mount and also a Bendix King
Av8tor that i let passengers play with. I found that the touch screen while flying is a real PITA. If it is perfectly smooth air, then it is not so bad, but one little bump and your off to a screen you dont want. Then your mind starts getting occupied with the gps insted of the flying airplane. I will not purchase a touch sreen for the airplane again, no matter who the manufacturer is. Like a good friend told me, big bulky clicky knobs and buttons are the best in a airplane for operator use.......I agree with him.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't base all touch screens on the AV8OR touch screen interface. As far as interfaces go, I found the AV8OR touch screen interface POOR. Garmin knows how to do touch screen and the interface of the Aera is similar in philosophy to the G3000. Also in any moving device, when using touch screen you need to anchor your hand somewhere on the unit and allow only you index finger to move. If you allow you hand to freely float over the unit, it will not be easy.

I have a mount for my Nuvi on my panel and using this technique, I don't have any problems using it.
 
todehnal said:
...I like the added privates airports...
Click to expand...
This appears to be a mistake on the product comparison page of the Garmin site. They show the 496 does not have private airports but the 496 does have that feature, or at least mine does. The 396 does not have that feature.
 
Last edited:
n5lp said:
This appears to be a mistake on the product comparison page of the Garmin site. They show the 496 does not have private airports but the 496 does have that feature, or at least mine does. The 396 does not have that feature.
Click to expand...
I wonder if it will let you update the private airports with such features as runway headings and frequencies?
 
Updates

Is this another Garmin/Jeppessen partnership designed to empty our bank accounts on updates? Anyone have any idea if it is absurdly expensive like the 696 and locks you out of charts if you don't update?
 
Updates

I followed a link from a Sporty's email and it looks like one of the selling points of the 560 ($1999) is that it includes free updates. Sounds like it might be a good deal if it is for the life of the unit.

Of course that begs the question...how much are the updates for the lower cost versions? I couldn't dig up an answer on the Garmin website but I'll bet someone on here can find it.
 
accelerometer in the gps

Mel said:
I have to go along with Gary on this one. I don't want a touch screen in my airplane. I can't fly that smoothly!
Click to expand...

My idea to solve this issue is to put a accelerometer in the gps, so it can detect when your in not so smooth air. Then when it gets bumpy make the buttons bigger! duh! Not sure why no one has done this yet. I'm going to be doing something like this on the next aviation touch screen project I'm working on.

Maybe you heard it here first.. maybe not.

Chris.
 
Mel said:
I have to go along with Gary on this one. I don't want a touch screen in my airplane. I can't fly that smoothly!
Click to expand...

Normally I always agree with Mel, and normally I'd agree about the touchscreen (which is one of the things I personally don't love about the AV8OR) that works like my Iphone. That being said, I wouldn't discount this product just yet, because I'm fairly certain they didn't take the Iphone type approach with this unit. You'll notice that unlike the Honeywell unit, the Garmin unit has an actual Bezel to rest a finger/hand on. From what I understand, they also are using a bit different technology for the touchscreen as well.

Anyway, I haven't done a lot of playing with this unit, but when I do I'll post a good review. I guess my point is I wouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater here until we see how well it actually works in the air.

Cheers,
Stein
 
I have a NUVI and I like it. I assume that they are using the same "touch screen" technology where you actually have to "press" the screen, but I still don't think I want it in an airplane.
 
Mel said:
I have a NUVI and I like it. I assume that they are using the same "touch screen" technology where you actually have to "press" the screen, but I still don't think I want it in an airplane.
Click to expand...

I flew the PDA-based AnywhereMap system for several years and quickly found the problems associated with a screen that required the use of a stylus in bumpy air. However, based on my experience with a Nuvi in the car, I believe the Aera will be much easier to use than the PDA. Touchscreen is where we are headed as evidenced by the new glass panels hitting the high-$$$$ markets.

Navigating by touch...just another skill we will learn and eventually accept as the norm. ;)
 
I guess I find it easier now than I used to...if you get a finger partly cut off, the stub they leave you has a much smaller and more focused area to use the touch screen stuff with. It's about the only benefit I've found to having a finger partially lopped off! :)

Cheers,
Stein
 
Missing feature?

From the description of the available jacks and outputs it seems the unit does not have the ability to drive an auto pilot.

Hope I'm wrong...
 
I hope the direct sunlight readability increased compared to my Nuvi 200W I have for my car. My car Nuvi is terrible in direct sun when the top is down, I don't know about it under an open RV canopy??? Anybody know about direct sunlight readibility?

Rudi
 
The serial ports are interfaced with that custom plug on the back of the unit. It's mate is built into the mount.

I will be curious to see how Airgizmo deals with this.....

I sure hope Airgizmo makes a mount that will fit in the same hole as their existing X96 mount.

They specifically mention compatibility with TIS data so there must be ports back there!

638RS said:
From the description of the available jacks and outputs it seems the unit does not have the ability to drive an auto pilot.

Hope I'm wrong...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Looks to be the same screen.....

RudiGreyling said:
I hope the direct sunlight readability increased compared to my Nuvi 200W I have for my car. My car Nuvi is terrible in direct sun when the top is down, I don't know about it under an open RV canopy??? Anybody know about direct sunlight readibility?

Rudi
Click to expand...
 
638RS said:
From the description of the available jacks and outputs it seems the unit does not have the ability to drive an auto pilot.

Hope I'm wrong...
Click to expand...


A quick review of the user manual suggests it has all of the outputs of the 496.

It specifically mentions an ability to output frequencies to the SL30 and connect with traffic devices.

The logic and menus appear consistent with the x96 series so if you can use them this should not be a difficult transition.
 
638RS said:
From the description of the available jacks and outputs it seems the unit does not have the ability to drive an auto pilot.

Hope I'm wrong...
Click to expand...

Page 140 in the manual. The connector on the back can interface with an optional flying lead cable.

The setup options seem to have the same options as the older units.

Should not be a problem.....
 
w1curtis said:
I would have hoped that they would have based their first touch screen unit on the marine GPSMAP 600 series unit. The 600 has a bigger screen and a longer battery life. I hope it has TWO separate serial ports, in addition to the XM USB port.

This unit is about the same size as the auto based Nuvi 800 series.

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=267550#post267550

Aera 500 (5.3 x 3.3 x 0.9, screen 3.8 x 2.25, 480x272 pixel, 9.5 oz, 5 hour battery)
cf-lg.jpg


GPS Map 600 (5.9 x 4 x 1.9, screen 4.5 x 2.7, 800x480 pixel, 17.3 oz, 9 hour battery)
cf-lg.jpg
Click to expand...


Yes that 600 screen resulotion looks awesome.
The new Aera has less pixels than the 296/396 it replaces.
Guess if they came it with the 600 screen resolution for lower end units, it would have been competition for the recently launced 696. So they pegged it for the low resolutions. Lucky I am 12 months away before I need a new GPS, so lets keep our fingers crossed.

Regards
Rudi
 
New Garmin handheld.

That Marine version would have been a no brainer to keep costs down use what you have. But the Nuvii! After last weeks annoucement in the business section of Garmins stock going down because now GPS will be offered FREE in the new CELL PHONES this year. So this wasn't about a better unit for aviators it was about $ and thats OK to keep people working.But stay with quality! Maybe TOM-TOM will get into aviation GPS with the PILOT in mind. My av8or is first gen and it looks like it. Graphics childs play. Lets get with it people, good graphics a MUST! Subscriptions for plates, come on don't knock our legs out from under us! $$$$$$$. XM weather maybe, @ $10 a month for a 6-month subscription for VFR people whom want to know but not to fly in it. I think its about time Advanced or GRT or Dynon build a Handheld that doesn't ROB us! After all in the lastest issue of AOPA there is a website for free IFR approach plates for your download pleasure of your state that was formed after learning the subscription rates for his GPS unit would require a partime job! If Garmin would follow their course with the Golf GPS we can avoid bunkers,(MNTS) Water hazards.(soft-fields) Trees(Trees) and put it in the hole(Airport) with all the confidence that Garmin has in the past with a whole lot less from the Wallet.
 
Keeping my 296

I did not like the fact that the new units won't work with older Jepp database info. The GPS 296 is no longer offered by Garmin now that the Aera is here. The GPS 296 has TWO serial ports via the same data power cable that fits 396 and 496 units which have only one RS-232. The Aera has a new data power interface plug, so the older data power cable will have to be replaced in your panel.

I helped a friend wire up his 396 to his Dynon D-10A, Trio autopilot, SL-30 NAV/COM, and GTX-330 for TIS. It all works on ONE RS-232 serial port. The GTX-330 is the only one sending data to the GPS, the others all listen to the output from the GPS. Trying to send radio frequencies to the SL-30 from the GPS did not sit well with the Trio autopilot.

Another thing that ticked me off was trying to find the Garmin web page to download the Jepp data base for my 296. I had to call customer service to find the page. I have it bookmarked now. The NEW Fly Garmin web pages will download directly to the GPS from the browser window, but a plug-in for the browser is required. That plug-in will not work with Win2000. You have to have XP or later running on your computer.

Here is the link to the old database download web page:
http://shop.garmin.com/aviation/databases/
 
Last edited:
New aera 510

I just got the 510 and really like it over all. IMO the 560's extra features are not worth the $$$ just the same as the 496. Also, Typing in turbulence has not been too bad so far.

+ BIG PLUS for me is the fact I can pop it right off the mount and toss it in my flight bag. No wires to mess with like the -96's.

- I can't seem to use the user waypoints....no direct to, no flight plan, and etc.....must be a bug. I can create and edit, but can't do anything with them.

- There is no Flight Plan editing on the map...would be nice.

Jason Krause
www.JDAir.com
 
Last edited:
Jason Krause said:
I just got the 510 and really like it over all. IMO the 560's extra features are not worth the $$$ just the same as the 496.
Click to expand...

Jason,

Thanks for the hands-on update!

I've sorta planned on a 496 for some time but don't expect to need it for 3-6 months, so the Aeras have caught my eye. My primary wants are:

- handheld backup to panel 430W, feeding 2nd input of GRT Sport and switchable to TT VSGV autopilot
- XM weather
- XM music
- final layer of backup flight instruments if both GRT & TT go TU

It seems to me that the 560 really only adds:
- SafeTaxi
- AOPA Airport Directory
- better terrain resolution
- a few street/driving enhancements that I'm not concerned about

Am I missing something / can you comment on that? I'm particularly curious as to whether you think it would be a superior choice to a 496 for my mission? How do you like the screen resolution in comparison to the -96's?

Thanks,

George
 
George

The 496/560 over 396/510 may really be useful for somebody, just not for me in my very frequent long and short VFR outings.

SafeTaxi....seems anything but. Looking at the GPS while taxing is probably a bad idea. It just seems I never had the time on the ground to utilize it.

AOPA Directory is OK. But a little preflight on the iPhone before I go works just as well. Not to mention airports are not too hard to navigate and the more difficult ones usually have a tower willing to help.

Terrain Res.....I really don’t see much difference between the two. If you see red (terrain map doom) and can't see out the window....probably shouldn't be there anyway and couldn’t/shouldn't rely on it anyhow.

Also I think update speed is a bit faster on the HSI page. It's claimed this could "almost" be used as a back up in IMC or something of the sort....again not needed or practical in my situation.

The resolution between the two at the dash distance appears the same.

Were you wanting more of compare between 496/560 units or the 510/560?

Jason Krause
www.JDAir.com
 
Last edited:
Super

Jason,

Thanks for the speedy reply, that was pretty much just what I was looking for.

If I keep my eye on my priorities and don't get distracted (look, something shiny :D) I'll probably end up with a new 510 or a used 496. Both meet my needs, the 510 seems to have the edge in terms of form factor and portability / ease of transfer between plane and car.

Looks like either will allow me to check the XM / XM Weather / backup instrument boxes.

NOT having the AOPA stuff might be fine just 'cuz it's two less databases to have to pay to update.

The person who creates, or can point me to, a comparison chart of both panel and handheld GPSs and their respective database/map upgrade costs will earn my eternal respect and admiration. Just trying to figure out what can be updated, and for how much, on any given product seems daunting, let along comparing a number of them.

Thanks again,

George
 
Garmin X96 products

All Garmin has to do is quit supporting databases and etc for the legacy units and they can force you into buying their new products or somebody else's. In my many years in the commercial aviation business most companies are more interested in selling "new" than supporting "old". Time will tell.
 
GXM 40 receiver

I noticed that several vendors have available for sale, the GXM 40 XM receiver for the Aera 5x0 GPS, separate from the unit. Does this mean that if you did not want or need XM now but wanted the option to upgrade to it later, you could buy the Aera 500 or 550 and then later purchase the GXM 40 to use with it? Will this work or will the software need to be updated or sent back to Garmin? If not then why even offer the GXM 40 antenna for sale? There can?t be that many that need a replacement receiver.

010-00730-00.jpg

https://www.gca.aero/detail/9469/GPS/GARMIN/GXM_40_XM_Receiver/
 
w1curtis said:
I noticed that several vendors have available for sale, the GXM 40 XM receiver for the Aera 5x0 GPS, separate from the unit. Does this mean that if you did not want or need XM now but wanted the option to upgrade to it later, you could buy the Aera 500 or 550 and then later purchase the GXM 40 to use with it? Will this work or will the software need to be updated or sent back to Garmin? If not then why even offer the GXM 40 antenna for sale? There can?t be that many that need a replacement receiver.

010-00730-00.jpg

https://www.gca.aero/detail/9469/GPS/GARMIN/GXM_40_XM_Receiver/
Click to expand...

The answer to the first part of your question is basically NO.

The last part: quick answer is because quite a few customers end up mounting the XM antenna permanently in the plane...and many people have multiple planes that they trade the GPS between so they need an additional antenna to put in the other plane(s). This is something quite common and often times we too will sell customers a 2nd or 3rd XM antenna.

Cheers,
Stein
 
Terrain Feature

I'm trying to understand the difference between the terrain resolution on the different Area models - 30 arc seconds on the 500/510 and 9 arc seconds on the 550/560.

In trying to understand this, I seem to recall that 1nm = 1 arc minute of lattitude, or 60 arc seconds of lattitude. Is this what the specs mean? If so then the terrain resolution on the 500/510 would be 0.5 nm and on the 550/560 it would be 0.15 nm (about 230 yards). That seems pretty coarse resolution to me. But yesterday I flew for the first time using the terrain page on the 430, and that was awfully coarse as well. It was usable, but pretty low resolution - big fat squares of yellow, red, or black.

Is this really the resolution of terrain on the Aera models? If not, can someone explain it better?

And how does this compare with terrain resolution on other garmin GPS units? I understand the the 496 has much higher resolution than the 396. How about the 430, which I now have a little bit of experience with? What's it's actual resolution? I understand that the terrain on the 430W is higher resolution than the 430. Does anyone know the actual resolution for either?

There are lots of mountains around me, with some of the nearby peaks around 12,000 MSL. Then there are narrow canyons. So to me, the resolution of the terrain feature does matter.
 
TThurston said:
Is this really the resolution of terrain on the Aera models? If not, can someone explain it better?

And how does this compare with terrain resolution on other garmin GPS units? I understand the the 496 has much higher resolution than the 396. How about the 430, which I now have a little bit of experience with? What's it's actual resolution?
Click to expand...

I think you figured it out pretty well. The resolution is limited quite a bit by memory and processor considerations, and the resolution of the actual database. Stateside I've found 3-sec resolution data is pretty common data and 1-sec data is available from a Shuttle mission done in 2000 (1-sec data is available stateside anyway). I kind of doubt that's where Garmin got their terrain data from.

Anyway, from comparing what I've seen on the 396 and 496 I'm guessing the two are also similar to the resolution steps you've calculated, but I haven't been able to find any actual specs on either.

I'm curious to see if they added any new proprietary NMEA sentences. I haven't seen any documented, but sometimes they toss something new in new lineups. If anyone does a data capture I'd love to see it.
 
Last edited:
resolution

this IS puzzling to me.
I just ordered a Geopilot ii +, and I've been wondering, just how much do you USE the resolution of terrain??? Don't you pretty much look out the window? The terrain on paper charts is almost useless; gee this is browner than that, and that looks like a pretty little valley coming up, ......no, actually....... it's a killer box canyon!
I thought the higher res. displays would make reading the tiny text and control area markings easier, but terrain?
I'm not in the market for weather, as I think there is little meaningful radar here in the interior of BC, but would hi-res colour weather be more indicative of rain etc. activity?
 
aerophoto said:
I'm curious to see if they added any new proprietary NMEA sentences. I haven't seen any documented, but sometimes they toss something new in new lineups. If anyone does a data capture I'd love to see it.
Click to expand...

Page 145 of the manual list them...
 
flyboy1963 said:
this IS puzzling to me.
I just ordered a Geopilot ii +, and I've been wondering, just how much do you USE the resolution of terrain???
Click to expand...

I fly over mountains a lot. Had a Garmin 496 before the present 696. You certainly look out the window, but I find it very useful for determining if I can make it over peaks or saddles in the distance without climbing in altitude. Much of the time the altitude is high enough, but sometimes it looks deceptive. Of course the great thing about terrain resolution/warnings is for those that fly at night or in IMC................when something isn't going as planned.

L.Adamson --- RV6A
 
flyboy1963 said:
I thought the higher res. displays would make reading the tiny text and control area markings easier, but terrain?
Click to expand...
As it's been said before - it's not display resolution that is different, it's how densely data point are stored. Imagine that points are sampled every few hundred feet on the ground - so between four points (inside the smallest square area sample) you can hide pretty big hole (or monument) if points are far apart.
 
Has anyone purchased one of these yet? Would be interested in some first-hand user comments.
 
I ordered one two days ago, should be here sometime this coming week. I have friends with the AV8OR and want to compare them. Look for a separate post with a review in a few weeks, or if there are questions specific to the Aera that you have send me a PM in a week or so and I should be able to answer it if it's something I can figure out with the unit in my hands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top