430 -vs- 420

[glenn654]

First off, I'm not an IFR guy so excuse me if this is a lame question.
Since the VOR system seems to be going the way of the DoDo, would a 420 be a good alternative to the 430? There seems to be a GPS approach for most airports w/ more coming. Would also save some cash which is always nice.

Comments Please......be gentle.


Glenn Wilkinson

[ccrawford]

What do you know, I didn't even know there was a 420W. If I had known that, I might have gotten one of those instead of a 300XL!

I like having the NAV on my SL30. I may never use it (though I suspect I'll be using it for ILS), but it's nice to have just in case. I do expect ILSs and VORs to go away at some point, but probably not for 10-15 years at least.

One of the things I'm paranoid about is that something will happen to our GPS constellation. Probably not a real issue, but I guess you never know.

If you are comfortable flying with GPS while IFR for all phases of flight and are comfortable with the level of coverage the current GPS approaches have, then by all means leave the NAV portion out. Sure would simplify wiring and antenna routing.

[SteinAir]

Here's the quick and short version. Forget the 420W and just buy a 430W. The cost difference is only about $6-700 between the 420 and 430's....which to me makes it dumb not to just go spend the extra few bucks and have the 430W. I know, I know..."VOR's are going away and nobody uses them"....I hear it all the time. But, I heard the same song 10 years ago!

In the end I guess if you're going to spend 90% of the cost of a 430W to get a 420W, why not spend the extra few percent. Weight is pretty close, size is the same, power is about the same and it doesn't hurt to have a VOR when you lose GPS reception (it does happen sometimes)!

My 2 cents as usual.

Cheers,
Stein

[Alan Carroll]

Glenn,

I think this really depends on whether you plan to fly IFR in the future? If so then having VOR/ILS seems like a must.

However, if you're planning on only flying VFR then I'd say don't buy either the 420 or 430. Get a com-only panel radio and a portable 396/496/696. The map displays on those units are better than on the 420/430, and you can probably get a used 396 plus a com radio for ~1/3 the cost of a new 430W.

[w1curtis]

The VOR system is not going away that soon. The 420 is a penny wise and pound foolish product. For the few hundred dollar difference in price, get the 430 and be prepared for whatever comes. Outside the US, VORs will continue to be used.

[bcondrey]

While you can navigate direct to VORs with GPS you can't track a radial. Just a few weeks ago flying into KSSF VFR I was given direct to a VOR and then outbound on the 170r.

While it might be OK to get a 420W I'd sure want to have something like an SL-30 as the #2 if you're going to be around busy airspace. I suppose if VFR you could always say "unable" and ask for vectors.

Bob
RV-10 N442PM

[w1curtis]

Originally Posted by bcondrey

While you can navigate direct to VORs with GPS you can't track a radial. Just a few weeks ago flying into KSSF VFR I was given direct to a VOR and then outbound on the 170r.

Hi Bob, how are things?

Well, not exactly. That is what the OBS button is for. Normally the GPS flys TO a fix, when in OBS button is pushed enroute however, the GPS will fly TO the fix/waypoint then fly outbound FROM the fix on a desired radial. With the OBS mode, you can fly a radial outbound from ANY (VOR, NDB, AIRPORT, Fix, etc) waypoint --way cool.

you can also use this method to fly a hold with only the GPS, however what works for me it to quickly create a way-point at the hold fix then alternate flying between it and the Navaid.

See Appendix C of the GNS-430 Pilots Guide.
http://www.garmin.com/manuals/2105_P...dReference.pdf

All of this being said, I still think a 430w is worth the money over a 420W.

[bcondrey]

Thanks William - I'll have to give it a try this weekend. I find it simpler to just set the EFIS to my nav#2 (SL-30) and deal with it that way, good ole fashioned (sort of) VOR nav.

Bob