|
Message
rusty - I have been flying with a airmap
300 for like 6 years(almost 1000hrs of flying). I also have a garmin pilot
III. I find the lowrance functions more logical, you can easily "talk"
your way through the various screens. the garmin has it's good points
too. vertical navigation is better. I believe the 1000 has improved
theirs however. what I have found works well is to use both of them.
the lowrance doesn't look backwards very well, i.e.., say you leave a busy
airport with a trip set up on the gps. (perhaps you forgot the tower freq)
it is easy to look up the runways and frequencies of your destination, but not
from where you just took off from. (it can be done using the 10 closest airports
button, then selecting, then bringing up the freqs....) having the second
gps for inquires and not concerned with your destination makes it a lot easier,
especially considering that you should be looking out the canopy when around
busy airports, not at a screen.
I think the new larger screen on the 1000
would be great. I am waiting for them to include ramps and taxiways on
their maps before I buy a new gps however. lowrance does have obstacles
over 250agl which has come in handy many times during min VFR conditions.
Florida has some 1/4+ mile tall antennas which don't bother me as much as the
guy wires.
I had problems once with my airmap,
numerals started looking Chinese, which is why I bought the pilot III, thinking
it would be months before I got it back. they replaced it in less than a
week. it has worked fine for years now.
be aware that the maps get real sketchy
as you head to AK. (and the airport in Homer, AK isn't really out in the
bay!). so, for making the garmin/lowrance choice, I'm sure it is a case of
what you grew up with (personally, I hate sidewinder circular saws for
instance)
|