Got a question for ya.

Ah, realism you say. What is not real about the Garmin 500? It refeclts closer to what I can afford. I really don't have any trouble getting from place to place with my K&E sliderule of 40 plus years that I still use. Hope you are as lucky with your calculations. The biggest help I have found has been the Roads USA. ;-)Not all AOPA memebers have the newest tool or aircraft.Regards,BobShttp://s95171098.onlinehome.us/junk/aopa.jpgSeems the rage to talk about the "size and speed" of each others computer. Beat this if you can for solving novel/unique problem anywhere in the cosmos. ..Have K&E and know how to use it!

>What is not real about the Garmin 500? Please read rest of the posts here as to what is not real with this unit. I am not going to repeat it 10-th time. For some reason you either refused to read this stuff or feel it makes no difference to you. If it is good enough for you then state so but don't be surprised it doesn't meet "realism" criteria for others.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

>Does the real unit have VNAV and waypoint hold capability?>>ShezYes, the Garmin GNS530 does have VNAV and waypoint hold capabilities.Let it be noted this is not an FMS and neither the VNAV will send any commands to the Autopilot or anything like that.It will give you vertical guidance, that's all. Download the GARMIN TRAINER and see for yourself guys.

Hi Bruce (great name!)"I guess it is a legacy of being a 16 bit text based application that makes it so difficult (eg the method used to input waypoints). I'm actually astounded that Garmin hasn't updated its software to contemporary standards with a much more user-friendly interface. "I'm actually looking at either of the RealityXP or the SimFlyer Garmin http://www.simflyer.net/shop/gnsv4.html (I see you asked the question on that comparison above).What does the "16 bit text based application" have to do with selecting either of these products? I'm not sure what that means :)Thanks, Bruce.

The following is based on what I think I know about the default FS9 GPS, RealityXP's offerings, and other add-on GPS products or freeware for FS9. Hopefully this will answer some of the questions here, or reinforce observations/answers made by others in this thread.1. The RXP 430/530 work so close to the real units as to be almost indistinguishable from them, other than the fact that you have to mouse around on the knobs and buttons. This is because they "wrap around" Garmin's own PC-based simulators, which include either all or most of the operating code in the real units. A limitation of these products is that the Jeppesen navaid/etc. database that is provided by Garmin is now quite old. Some simmers have a problem with this, but I don't find it to be a big deal for my needs.2. The Garmin PC simulator is a 16-bit application - since the real box is too. This is where the RXP folks have done a LOT of work to make it play nice with the 32 bit OSs that we run. Their latest version has done even more in this regard, and the new stuff also...3. ...allows two RXP Garmin units to be installed into an airplane, and have "cross-fill" capabilities (where you can exchange data, e.g. flightplans, between the two units). This can be very useful, especially in IFR flying. (This capability is via an optional bit of software that RXP offers.)4. ALL OTHER would-be Garmin add-on products, and the FS9 one itself, are emulations. and none of these provide any type of crossfill. At least the FS9 GPS500 and, I suspect, the SimFlyer product is/are written in XML. As an emulation, the FS9 GPS500 is a pretty good one, and is probably fine for simpilots. BUT - and this is a huge but for me and I suspect other real world pilots - it does not exactly emulate the GNS00, especially in terms of how it works for instrument approach procedures. Also, the overall implementation is incomplete as someone else mentioned. For the purpose of becoming a better Garmin operator, I want things to work EXACTLY as the real boxes do. 5. No one has yet announced an *accurate* GNS480 add-on for FS9, so for now (at least as far as I'm aware) there is no FS9 add-on that supports the new VNAV/etc. approaches that are gradually coming on-line across the US. Garmin has a PC-based emulator for the 480; I've played with it some and I'm not sure it's robust enough to do the RXP wrapper thing that was done for the 430/530s (keep in mind that the 480 was inherited from, uh, I think it was UPS-AT, who wrote the emulator prior to handing the product over to Garmin, so everything is different).6. I didn't read every post here in depth but just in case someone didn't mention it, the GNS430/530's VNAV mode is unrelated to the VNAV type GPS approaches mentioned above. Right now I can't remember whether Garmin has promised this sort of upgrade for the 430/530...A closing, final observation is that more than one company seems to be taking the XML code of the FS9 GPS500 and tweaking it to look like something else. I am pretty sure that SimFlyer is doing this, and based on my very limited playing around with the KLN80B in my new Flight1 PC-12, I think that unit is a similar effort (but very well done). This is not a slam against any company - different simmers have different levels of requirement. I'm sure it's clear that *my* requirements are for as much accuracy as is possible, which is why I'll be pursuing a way to get the RXP530 (or maybe 430, although I don't own it yet) integrated into "my" PC12.Dave Blevins

Thank you Dave for that excellent post, you seemed to have summed up all the issues very well. I'm not a pilot but I can well appreciate that real life pilots would want the procedures used for their PC flying mimic real life as closely as possible. However, to return to the initial query in my original post, from your comments it seems that the Simflyer GNS480 falls short of being "accurate" grateful if you could briefly explain why. Is this just because it is an XML emulation or are there other considerations?Bruceb

Thanks 4 the comments Arnold.For all FSgarimn500 users ... You declutter the Nav screen by "pushing" the "clr" button below the "menu" button. 4 levels of declutter are available. Look under the "zoom" on the left side of the nav screen.Like the 530, the 500 does have a "VSR" (vertical speed rate) displayed to the waypoint/airport. The units are in feet per second and not fpm that we see on the panel. Look for it on the left side of the display.In FS2002 I was a very early buyer of Sim Systems, John H from Queensland, FSgarmin and fsflightMax. The good part about these were they can be operated on a networked remote computer and charts from the real world could be calbrated and installed. I don't think any other choices available now have those two kewl features for the 530/430. Haven't installed in fs2004 because of the need for fsuipc. My choice not to install even when only the free version is all that is needed, thus the fs9 garmin is good enough for me and I think I know just about all of its ins-and-outs. Oh, my AOPA mag was in the mailbox this afternoon. Was yours? :-) I get the "Flight Training" issue. Regards,BobShttp://s95171098.onlinehome.us/junk/aopa.jpgSeems the rage to talk about the "size and speed" of each others computer. Beat this if you can for solving novel/unique problem anywhere in the cosmos. ..Have K&E and know how to use it!

Thanks Dave, as the other Bruce says, this is an excellent post.The plane I fly has a KLN 94 GPS, but our FTD has the Garmin GPS/COMM, which I always have to get used to when I do IFR currency checks. I think I'm sold on the RXP unit.Bruce.

I never thought I'd get to use this salutation, but given the opportunity, I cannot resist - "Bruces": 8^)- Bruce from Colorado: I certainly wish there was a decent KLN94 for FS9, but it doesn't exist. Bendix/King has been promising one for ages and ages (read: 3 years - I had an email dialog with a B/K person in 2002), apparently written by Elite, but *still* no sign of that as of yet. I am not convinced it will ever happen.(I did my instrument rating in a 172SP with a KLN94, and never did get as comfortable as I wanted to with it for instrument approaches.)- Bruceb: although I have not personally fiddled with the Simflyer products, if they're based on FS9's XML-based "GPS500", then I'd bet your favorite adult beverage (or Jamba Juice?) that the true inner workings are still quite similar to the "GPS500", and not at all like those of the real GNS480 or its PC-based simulator. The inner workings of any real GPS unit are quite complex and I would not expect an FS9 vendor to get anywhere close to a 100% accurate emulation of a real box, due to the "diminishing (monetary) returns on the development effort". For a simulator that "real pilots" are going to use, the simulator vendor will just buy a real GPS box and interface it to FS9 (or whatever simulator engine they're using - some use X-Plane for instance).That said - if you're not going to use the real units anytime soon, then even the FS GPS500 box will serve as a pretty good, generic simulation of an instrument approach-capable GPS unit. Frankly I was quite surprised at how good it was when FS2004 first came out, and had I not already been somewhat familiar with the real unit I don't think I would've known the difference. The biggest beef I have with it is that you can't enter flight plans directly into it - you have to use FS's own flight planner (which, if I may opine, is incredibly lame).FWIW I feel that the capabilities that the RealityXP "Garmin" products give us flightsim types are pretty incredible - but only because (a) Garmin distributed an emulator based on the real units' code, and (:( RXP (and earlier, FSAvionics - R.I.P.) was able to figure out a way to interface it to FS9. The "unfortunate" aspect of this is that, at least for me, it's raised my expectation level to a new height - one that I don't expect to be surpassed anytime soon by FS add-on developers.cheers,dB

Hi dB," never thought I'd get to use this salutation, but given the opportunity, I cannot resist - "Bruces": 8^)"Straight from the sheep dip (for those who are Monty Pyhton inclined)...I too did my IR in a C172S w/ KLN94 and KMD550 MFD. I wish that a decent KLN94 had been developed for the PC. Would have helped me a lot. One of the largest factors in the high crash rate of single pilot IMC flight is the pilot focusing on the GPS, trying to figure out how to do something, and not flying the airplane (see latest Flying magazine).I've since bought the RXP GNS430, and have yet to really try it out. Our club has the 430 and 530 manuals, which I've downloaded (430) and printed some pages from- I see that a flight demo is provided in the front of the manual to acquaint one with the unit (like a flight tutorial)- cool manual.Our club also has a link to the Garmin PC trainerhttp://www.garmin.com/aviation/#which I gather is similar to the trainer that runs in the background on FS with the RXP unit?I'm looking forward to many hours exploring the 430.Bruce.

The Garmin PC trainer is not only similar, but in fact identical to the one used in the RXP GNS430.

Thanks Bert, a good product!Bruce.

Bruce, just for completeness sake... the user interface to the knobs and buttons is different (more sophisticated) on the RXP unit than it is on the PC Trainer, so make sure you read that part of the documentation :-)

Thanks Bert, I certainly will :)Bruce.