My GNS430W is lost!
I remember reading/hearing somewhere that some receivers need new coax and or aerials though I cannot remember if this was for an older GPS being replaced by a newer one or for the upgrade to W status for the 430. I'm pretty sure it was for the W upgrade.
I know the at least from a legal perspective that the 430 and 430W are not plug and play and I think there are physical issues as well as legal ones. Either way I think using old coax and aerials would cause a Loss of Integrity problem (which would be flagged on the GPS) this is not the issue that the Doc had.
I agree we need WAAS in this part of the world but WAAS is not designed to augment dud satellites.
How would you know when the GPS is using FDE to disregard a bad signal, unless there were insufficient satellites left to obtain a position solution then you would be getting an integrity warning.
Good idea to keep cell phones switched off. There again in my opinion they would cause a loss of integrity or RAIM warning.
Handhelds don't have RAIM or FDE capability so would not give any warning even though they may be giving dud navigation information.
From what the Doc says there were no warning messages from the GPS.
These units meet the standard for sole means navigation, which means that they meet certain standards to guarantee accurate navigation providing FDE calculations are done for the route and the time of the flight. They also give warnings when navigation is compromised.
I still stick by my original theory about WAAS being enabled.
I guess it is possible that something was going on at Tindal and the US Department of Defence had reason to downgrade coverage in that area however I don't think that would even explain the error the Doc mentioned.
I know the at least from a legal perspective that the 430 and 430W are not plug and play and I think there are physical issues as well as legal ones. Either way I think using old coax and aerials would cause a Loss of Integrity problem (which would be flagged on the GPS) this is not the issue that the Doc had.
What it does indicate is the need for WAAS ground receivers to augment if there is a dud satellite.
Which brings up the next question...why didn't FDE kick in and block the dud signal, Doc?
Keep all GSM/Next G devices turned off and see if problem repeats itself. Then Try again and a again with them on. If in IMC make sure all are off.
I have seen G295(5 yrs ago) with own antennae connected (no coax) do a similar thing and also about the range for GSM starting to reconnect.
I have seen G295(5 yrs ago) with own antennae connected (no coax) do a similar thing and also about the range for GSM starting to reconnect.
Handhelds don't have RAIM or FDE capability so would not give any warning even though they may be giving dud navigation information.
From what the Doc says there were no warning messages from the GPS.
These units meet the standard for sole means navigation, which means that they meet certain standards to guarantee accurate navigation providing FDE calculations are done for the route and the time of the flight. They also give warnings when navigation is compromised.
I still stick by my original theory about WAAS being enabled.
I guess it is possible that something was going on at Tindal and the US Department of Defence had reason to downgrade coverage in that area however I don't think that would even explain the error the Doc mentioned.
...I guess it is possible that something was going on at Tindal and the US Department of Defence had reason to downgrade coverage in that area however I don't think that would even explain the error the Doc mentioned.
FTDK mentions this in another thread "...they were caused by a UFO passing through at warp speed!.."
........
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: turn L @ Taupo, just past the Niagra Falls...
Posts: 596
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 27/09
... something was going on at Tindal and the US Department of Defence had reason to downgrade coverage in that area...
Thread Starter
I remember reading/hearing somewhere that some receivers need new coax and or aerials though I cannot remember if this was for an older GPS being replaced by a newer one or for the upgrade to W status for the 430. I'm pretty sure it was for the W upgrade.
Dr
hmmm... doubtful, methinks. That would lead to the 496 giving erroneous guidance also, surely? And wouldn't such an event be NOTAMed?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Dr did you check RAIM via the ASA site on that day? There are almost daily short outages for FDE (I think due to satellites going outside useful sight so to say), and that might have impaired the FDE which could contribute to the error. I don't know how the W software works and whether impaired FDE could actually be worse than normal RAIM processing, but from a software perspective I'm with the other sceptics here and would say give the unit a firmware check and a few test flights --finally a chance to use the plethora of backup GPS's 
Have a look at this RAIM prediction for today for Tindal, I get similar results around BN pretty much every day..
Have a look at this RAIM prediction for today for Tindal, I get similar results around BN pretty much every day..
TINDAL (YPTN)
GPS RAIM PREDICTION 191400
YPTN
TSO-C129 (AND EQUIVALENT)
FAULT DETECTION
NO GPS RAIM FD OUTAGES FOR NPA
TSO-C146A (AND EQUIVALENT)
FAULT DETECTION
NO GPS RAIM FD OUTAGES FOR NPA
FAULT DETECTION AND EXCLUSION
05192021 TIL 05192035
05200815 TIL 05200837
05202017 TIL 05202031
05210810 TIL 05210833
05212013 TIL 05212027
05220806 TIL 05220829
GPS RAIM FDE UNAVBL FOR NPA
GPS RAIM PREDICTION 191400
YPTN
TSO-C129 (AND EQUIVALENT)
FAULT DETECTION
NO GPS RAIM FD OUTAGES FOR NPA
TSO-C146A (AND EQUIVALENT)
FAULT DETECTION
NO GPS RAIM FD OUTAGES FOR NPA
FAULT DETECTION AND EXCLUSION
05192021 TIL 05192035
05200815 TIL 05200837
05202017 TIL 05202031
05210810 TIL 05210833
05212013 TIL 05212027
05220806 TIL 05220829
GPS RAIM FDE UNAVBL FOR NPA
PlankBlender
Can you forward me the link to that website with the GPS outages.
Does it only cover Australia?
Cheers
Can you forward me the link to that website with the GPS outages.
Does it only cover Australia?
Cheers
Plankbender
It is my understanding that you will get an Integrity or loss of RAIM warning during those periods. Since there was no warnings I don't think it is an FDE or RAIM issue.
It is my understanding that you will get an Integrity or loss of RAIM warning during those periods. Since there was no warnings I don't think it is an FDE or RAIM issue.
Thread Starter
My GNS430W was not lost after all! It was not even slightly disoriented!
Mystery solved!
You can all go back to faithfully following your GPSs.
The world has been restored to its normal axis!
Fantastic gear - idiot pilot!
Dr
You can all go back to faithfully following your GPSs.
The world has been restored to its normal axis!
Fantastic gear - idiot pilot!
Dr
Thread Starter
Oh Come ON!!! Put us out of our misery!!! Wot happened?
Dr
Last edited by ForkTailedDrKiller; 20th May 2009 at 07:32.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: turn L @ Taupo, just past the Niagra Falls...
Posts: 596
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FTDK
Not saying - and you can't make me!
Can probably guess what might have gone on then... can happen to any of us. Pleased it's all ducks-in-a-row again!
Guest
Posts: n/a
geeup, where are you located? Hagen/Germany? For AUS and nearby territories, it's here: Airservices Australia - Flight Briefing - Pilot Briefing Services
You should have the equivalent in your country, here's a tool from Europe that seems to work globally: AUGUR GPS RAIM Prediction Tool - Terminal/Approach Tool
AUGUR also shows up the small outages I alluded to in my earlier post (enter YBAF for example).
DR c'mon, spills the beans, we could all learn something!
You should have the equivalent in your country, here's a tool from Europe that seems to work globally: AUGUR GPS RAIM Prediction Tool - Terminal/Approach Tool
AUGUR also shows up the small outages I alluded to in my earlier post (enter YBAF for example).
DR c'mon, spills the beans, we could all learn something!
Thread Starter
RS
Psssst! If you promise not to tell anyone - I had a parallel track offset selected.
"When you reach the end of the flight plan, a message will state 'parallel offset track terminating in X seconds'. The message will be given when the aircraft reaches the offset distance from the end of the parallel track. This will give the pilot sufficient time to intercept the original course."
Psssst! If you promise not to tell anyone - I had a parallel track offset selected.
"When you reach the end of the flight plan, a message will state 'parallel offset track terminating in X seconds'. The message will be given when the aircraft reaches the offset distance from the end of the parallel track. This will give the pilot sufficient time to intercept the original course."
Had I been in IMC (and therefore not been able to see where the aerodrome was from 30+ miles out) I would have got the message and hit the "direct to" button!
I have made a considerable effort to learn the ins and outs of G430W (as you must with GPS), but I had forgotten that one!
Thanks to all who suggested what the problem might have been.
Dr
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: turn L @ Taupo, just past the Niagra Falls...
Posts: 596
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ooh yeah, that's a 'gotcha'! But as you say, it would have taken you where you needed be! Thanks for that -something we all need to be aware of.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: turn L @ Taupo, just past the Niagra Falls...
Posts: 596
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sprocket check
Why would you do that?
The Offset (or parallel track) feature can cause all sorts of problems at the end of the flt. This is mainly caused by the very small sector from the Navaid to the Airfield (ie TN to YPTN). I have seen up to 30 miles and 5 minutes "added" to the total dist/time due to the system trying to work out how to add the xx mile offset to a half mile leg distance. Once you load the runway/Star/Approach, this small sector is removed but you can still have problems.
Pleased you got it sorted and your faith in technology restored. The parallel track option wasn't something I had thought about, it's not something I would be likely to use.
Even though you probably feel rather sheepish about it all, it was very noble of you to share what caused the problem. Your frank admission might save someones bacon one day.
Even though you probably feel rather sheepish about it all, it was very noble of you to share what caused the problem. Your frank admission might save someones bacon one day.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't it an actual requirement to track 1 mile to the right of intended track to avoid conflicting traffic in the opposite direction? (even moreso with the advent of GPS)