Garmin 396 Announced
 

I don't think it's hit the website quite yet (should momentarily), but the Garmin 396 handheld has now been announced. As others have suspected, the 396 brings the addition of XM weather and audio to a platform somewhat similar to the 296. It also provides capability to display TIS traffic via the GTX 330 interface. Having seen this firsthand, I can say that this is truly an awesome product!

Garmin 396
 

Cool - I hope that means the 296 will drop a bit in price!

PS

The Garmin web site now lists the 396. Retail list price is $2695 and they will offer the automobile add on for free at Oshkosh.

Wow! Have the price of our toys gone up or what?

And after you've wended your way through the clutter, bumps, bursts and TFR's, you better pray it's VMC where you're going because legally, for your $2695 suggested retail you can't legally use it to shoot an approach!

I'll be the first to affirm that it's a lot of package for the money. But, for my $0.02, if I really need those capabilities to fly the way I'm going to fly, I want them in my panel and certified.

But for 1/2 of that price? Hmmmmmmmm........

Although I agree that on the surface it appears to be expensive....

Many folks out there now are using the AnywhereMap WX product...which is just an Ipaq, an XM antenna and a GPS for $2,595. And let me tell you...I think the 396 will beat the AnywhereMap product hands-down. Purpose-built devices are almost always better than cludged together solutions.

To add XM WX to a 430 you'd need the GDL 69 (MSRP $4995). Why not keep your 430 screen free and add the 396 for WX, TIS and terrain? Although I agree there is just something inherently elegant about all panel-mounted devices...a savings of multiple thousands of dollars to get WX in the cockpit (plus add another NICE moving map for backup) is...well...a no-brainer...but that's only my humble opinion.

Respectfully,

Both a 430 and a 396 in the panel? Sure, why not! Gotta run down to Kinko's and use their best copier to print up some new cash...

Sorry, couldn't resist! I'm just an economy minded type who's glad to see the 396 introduced since the price of the 296 might now come down a couple hundred bucks... and that's all the capability I need. Yeaaa.

Absolutely no argument there whatsoever! Nor do I disagree that it's a powerfull package, comparatively speaking, for the price!

I was a fairly early adopter of the AnywhereMap product myself (actually put it to good use one early September morning back in 2001 when I was denied access to the Houston Class B and told to land immediately!). But by the time I had everything connected, I needed a plan for just managing all the cables, and still couldn't file /G!

I think my comment was more of a philosophical one than anything else. The older I get the more I seem to notice our almost complete reliance on technology rather than common sense. I can easily see people jumping in their planes without regard for proper briefings just because they have a nice "weather picture" painted for them in the cockpit. Having that technology available does not always constitute that it will be used properly.

There have been a couple of times I would have appreciated having that info while in (semi) hard IFR in my Cherokee. ATC was not as quick to point out the SERIOUS convective activity very near me as I would have liked. However, I was in constant communication with ATC. I wonder how many will assume they have as much information as they would ever need with the 396 to go forth without benefit of another opinion or set of eyes?

Hence my comment about our toys. If used "strictly" as Garmin is promoting this unit to be used, for "Unparalleled Situational Awareness", it is in fact little more than a toy. People have been safely flying higher, faster and farther for decades without any of those capabilities. What concerns me is that this really cool toy will be used by people to go where even ATP's fear to tread!

Like I said though, for half of that price (plus or minus) I would trade in my (now) trusty Garmin 195!

This thing is a serious chunk of change. Now I will have to decide whether the 296 or 396, but with the 396 you get to pay $75 startup fee plus $30 or $50 per month to use it (cost of XM weather subscription). From what I can see the 396 is identical to the 296 with XM added???

I plan to fly IFR but I don't know if it is really worth spending $1000 more for the GPS plus $30 a month to have weather. That buys a bunch of gas and I figure my plane will be used IFR (actual) relatively little.

Hmmm....

Scott

Just wondering, why can't you use them "legally" and why would you want "certified"?

The reason I ask, the process of getting something "certified" (or TSO'ed) is expensive and adds a lot to the price but actually does nothing for the instrument. It may make you feel more confident in the instrument but that's just a feeling and again, does nothing for the instrument.

The instrumentation I have seen in some RV's is actually much better than I have seen in a number of old "IFR certified" C-172s yet these instruments aren't TSO'ed, cost much less and provide better information to the pilot.

I'm not flaming you, just trying to illustrate a point. These aren't traditional certified airplanes, there is no requirement (except maybe a personal choice) for TSO'ed instruments. A lot of builders fly behind experimental engines and trust them, is there really any reason not to fly behind non-TSO'ed instruments and trust them as well?

Rat

The most important part of GPS certifiability is stated with one word: RAIM.

Other issues come up with portable devices and how they might work differently when switched between different aircraft, but RAIM is a biggie as far as I can tell.