Data Depravity- Garmin-Jepp

[John Pleisse]

Like many of you, I just paid a $1,200 bill with Jepp yesterday for basic data subscriptions for 2 x 430W's and and Aspen 2000 system. This doesn't include forgoing plates with Seattle Avionics and paying an additional $279 to Foreflight every year for paper replacements and wx apps. Here's the problem:

 

1) Garmin makes their data cards and operating software proprietary, regulating cross fill

2) They won't play in the same sandbox with Aspen

3) Both Aspen and Garmin have data deals with providers and likely get a % or kick back or some consideration

4) If you spend a grand or more a year (or two cents) with Jeppesen, they don't provide any help

 

So here's what we have. Avionics companies who don't reward customers for buying more than one of their products and are complicit in outright monopolies with only one or two data companies, who in turn, sell us information that should be free. Not only that, they (Jepp) don't have brains enough to realize the power of goodwill and give a small discount for buying more than one data subscription. Given app penetration, they should be giving low charts away for cost!!!!!

 

Now, if I am ever given the opportunity to buy good avionics again, I will strongly consider the overt, predatory nature of Garmin's business model and absolute, utter lack of sensitivity to a customer that spends $30k on more than one of their products (aviation, only). This doesn't include a series 3000 touch screen on my boat, mountain biking GPS, golf watch, two Nuve's and two Virbs.

 

So, while Garmin has expanded with superior products and calculated exclusivity, they have alienated for life, a financially able, P-1 customer. I bought their other products because of my exposure to their aviation line. When able, I will not just avoid their aviation products, but all of their other products. Think I am messing? With 2 x430W's, I was a top candidate for a G500......I put my money on Aspen. This is just the beginning....on the boat, it'll be Simrad. Oh and both Aspen and Simrad are comparable or even better designed and built. Virbs? After the Elite launch, GO Pro still has a better picture.

 

When it comes to data, neither Garmin or Jepp are so good at what they do, that they can't operate without a realistic sense of decency.

[Mooneymite]

Oh, yes!

 

This is a well known and hated situation.

 

I think Garmin got it's business plan from the ink-jet industry.  Buy a reasonable priced printer and pay exhorbitant costs for the refills.

 

I discussed this with a Garmin rep a couple of years ago.  He let me know that in the future, data cards would be matched to navigation boxes to stamp out the practice of sharing data cards.  They are not sympathetic at all.

 

However, Jepp is worse.  Ever since Boeing bought Jeppesen, there has been nothing but trouble and expense for their customers.  If you think we're getting the shaft, talk to the airlines!

 

The nav-data is public domain.  The taxpayers have already paid for it.  Jeppesen/Garmin just has a lock on the proprietary format.

 

Here's hoping Dynon beats the daylights out of Garmin and the data-peddlers!

 

Okay.....remember the days when the cockpit was equipped with two VOR/ILS's and keeping the database current entailed buying a set of approach plates?

 

.

[1964-M20E]

I agree.  I have a KLN94 and it is a challenge each time I update my database.  I understand that the databases have to be prepared but I’m sure that most if not all of this process is automated and they simply push a button verify and gather money from us to use the data.  Several things that could help with this:

 

1. Make all chart and procedure updates semiannual.  That is update them every 6 months.  Updating more than that is simply a waste of taxpayers’ dollars at the FAA and our hard earned remaining dollars with Jepp, Garmin and King.  The 28 day cycle currently in use is an excessive waste of money
2. Make the certification process for avionics much simpler and faster so that more players could participate and drive competition
3. Remove STC requirements for TSO avionics in planes so that once the product is tested and working it can be installed in any aircraft.
4. Avidyne may have an out for you by the end of the year fi they can get their IFD440 moving(540 is supposed to be shipping by Q2).  It is a slide in replacement for the 430.

[Mooneymite]

 

 

1. Make all chart and procedure updates semiannual.  That is update them every 6 months.  Updating more than that is simply a waste of taxpayers’ dollars at the FAA and our hard earned remaining dollars with Jepp, Garmin and King.  The 28 day cycle currently in use is an excessive waste of mone

 

The problem with the long up-date periods is that the chart-notams would take a month to review toward the end of the 6 month period!

 

Most of the time the notams concern some minor detail, but sometimes it is a "really" important change.

[yvesg]

FYI, in canada, VFR maps are updated once a year. The CFS (Canada flight supplement) is good for 56 days, so are the IFR plates and IFR maps IIRC.

Yves

[pinerunner]

Yep,

 

And in the meantime you  can download geoTiff sectional charts from the FAA for free! I've got PDF's of IFR charts for free too. I like to use SkyVectors free site to do initial planning; their airport data includes approach plate PDF's that appear to be currant including dates on the edge. Skyvector also highlights in red TFR areas and seems to keep it currant (though I haven't validated that and they probably don't guarantee it). 

 

I bet these companies that are chiseling us so get their starting data from the same free sites. 

 

You're pushing the go button on one of my pet peeves.  I want value for my dollar.

[1964-M20E]

The problem with the long up-date periods is that the chart-notams would take a month to review toward the end of the 6 month period!

 

Most of the time the notams concern some minor detail, but sometimes it is a "really" important change.

No either the approach is available or it is not and if you are flying IFR ATC won’t give you an approach that is not available.

 

Most approaches are not changed much if at all over years.  I’ve gone back to look at approaches from several years ago and there were no changes to the current one or the changes were so slight that you could have used the old one and not have any problems.

 

I know for a fact that there was an NDB approach for KASD that per NOTAMS was disabled for almost a year before the approach plate finally was removed from the books.

[John Pleisse]

Yep,

You're pushing the go button on one of my pet peeves.

[Mooneymite]

No either the approach is available or it is not and if you are flying IFR ATC won’t give you an approach that is not available.

Most approaches are not changed much if at all over years. I’ve gone back to look at approaches from several years ago and there were no changes to the current one or the changes were so slight that you could have used the old one and not have any problems.

I know for a fact that there was an NDB approach for KASD that per NOTAMS was disabled for almost a year before the approach plate finally was removed from the books.

I probably wasn't clear in my post.

Jepp updates include all the changes that have been posted in the up-date period. These may be procedure, or minimum changes, or just some minor editing. The longer the up-date period, the more changes would have to be NOTAMed. While it is true that some FDC notams take a long time to be applied, the theory is that an up-dated data base includes the recent changes.

Several ATL area airports had approaches that were N/A'd for more than a year, but they disappeared from the Jepp database even though they were still included in the paper plates. Obviously, ATC could not assign them, as long as the controller knew they were N/A'd by NOTAM.

Regardless of all this, the taxpayers should have access to FAA nav-data without Jeppesen inserting itself as a middleman with a proprietary format.

[Marauder]

Like many of you, I just paid a $1,200 bill with Jepp yesterday for basic data subscriptions for 2 x 430W's and and Aspen 2000 system. This doesn't include forgoing plates with Seattle Avionics and paying an additional $279 to Foreflight every year for paper replacements and wx apps. Here's the problem:

 

1) Garmin makes their data cards and operating software proprietary, regulating cross fill

2) They won't play in the same sandbox with Aspen

3) Both Aspen and Garmin have data deals with providers and likely get a % or kick back or some consideration

4) If you spend a grand or more a year (or two cents) with Jeppesen, they don't provide any help

 

So here's what we have. Avionics companies who don't reward customers for buying more than one of their products and are complicit in outright monopolies with only one or two data companies, who in turn, sell us information that should be free. Not only that, they (Jepp) don't have brains enough to realize the power of goodwill and give a small discount for buying more than one data subscription. Given app penetration, they should be giving low charts away for cost!!!!!

 

Now, if I am ever given the opportunity to buy good avionics again, I will strongly consider the overt, predatory nature of Garmin's business model and absolute, utter lack of sensitivity to a customer that spends $30k on more than one of their products (aviation, only). This doesn't include a series 3000 touch screen on my boat, mountain biking GPS, golf watch, two Nuve's and two Virbs.

 

So, while Garmin has expanded with superior products and calculated exclusivity, they have alienated for life, a financially able, P-1 customer. I bought their other products because of my exposure to their aviation line. When able, I will not just avoid their aviation products, but all of their other products. Think I am messing? With 2 x430W's, I was a top candidate for a G500......I put my money on Aspen. This is just the beginning....on the boat, it'll be Simrad. Oh and both Aspen and Simrad are comparable or even better designed and built. Virbs? After the Elite launch, GO Pro still has a better picture.

 

When it comes to data, neither Garmin or Jepp are so good at what they do, that they can't operate without a realistic sense of decency.

 

Too funny John! I just wrote my check to them for the GTN and Aspen as well. And I too had the same emotional response. What irritates me is that the source of the data is electronic and comes from the government -- they just repackage it electronically and put it into a subscription service so they can charge what they do. Garmin figured out with the GTN series that they could make money on the databases and offer it as part of their PilotPak. The good news is that if I had two GTNs, they would charge the same price -- but it is $100 more than the Jepp subscription.

 

As for the Aspen charts. Keep looking for deals from Seattle Avionics. I picked up a multi-year subscription on Black Friday that brought the cost down to $99/year.

[Cruiser]

we had this discussion around the coffee table this morning at the airport as I had to stop by to pick up my NavData cards to take home and update. I predict the next leap in technology will be the ability to upload navdata on the fly. Realtime. 

 

You file a flight plan, takeoff and the ADS-B system will upload all the needed charts, plates and navigation info to your Aspen Connected panel as you fly. You will never need to download data again.

 

Garmin/Jepp are just begging for some sharp technological company to come in and treat their customers fairly.

[1964-M20E]

 

Regardless of all this, the taxpayers should have access to FAA nav-data without Jeppesen inserting itself as a middleman with a propietary format.

 

I fully agree. 

[N33GG]

I fully support everybody's right to decide and spend money wherever they choose.  We all get to vote in the free market with our money.  There is a long history of big companies getting a bit too full of themselves.  Big companies can indeed go too far and suffer the wrath of unhappy customers, and hence suffer accordingly.  May the free market prevail!

[jetdriven]

I agree. I have a KLN94 and it is a challenge each time I update my database. I understand that the databases have to be prepared but I’m sure that most if not all of this process is automated and they simply push a button verify and gather money from us to use the data. Several things that could help with this:

• Avidyne may have an out for you by the end of the year fi they can get their IFD440 moving(540 is supposed to be shipping by Q2). It is a slide in replacement for the 430.

Guess who Avidyne is using for the iFD 440/540 charts? Jeppesen.

[MB65E]

So if you happen to have multiple GTN's they all need to be added to the Flygarmin account BEFORE you hit purchase pilot pack! This is the best thing Garmin has done to help its customers.

My Jepp rep was bummed when I pulled all my other nav data from their service manager. He totally understood regarding the unlock cost.

Silly learning curve however...

-Matt

[MB65E]

Well sort of.... Only 2 GTN units can be loaded in each pilot pack... Not 4.

They still have you by the balls!

-Matt

[KSMooniac]

I wish we could team-up and have somebody buy a pilot pack of 16 databases and get a big discount.  

 

I can't believe somebody hasn't come along and figured out how to re-package the same data that Jepp does from the feds and sell it at a lower price.  

[Mooneymite]

I wish we could team-up and have somebody buy a pilot pack of 16 databases and get a big discount.  

 

I can't believe somebody hasn't come along and figured out how to re-package the same data that Jepp does from the feds and sell it at a lower price.  

 

I suspect "someone" has long ago figured out how to decode and copy the Jepp data.  However, "he" is probably in jail.

 

There's a rea$on that Garmin developed proprietary data protocols.

[Piloto]

You do not need to update the database monthly. If you have verified there is no changes on it for your route or approach it is perfectly legal to use an expired database. I verify the destination plates using Airnav.com plates, it is free. I only update once a year at the most. I do not think there is anyone here that fly to that many different destinations in the US in a Mooney in a month. Most of my flights are to the same destinations and rarely there is any changes. Airports position never changes and any frequency changes you can find them for free on Airnav.com using your smart phone. I may sound cheap but I care about needless expenses. I find ridiculus paying $1K for the whole USA air data when I only fly to a few airports. I would rather pay for an XM\WX $30/month subscription where data changes on an hourly basis and keeps me from getting in trouble with weather. After all surface winds at my destinations changes more often than the approach plates.

 

José      

[Mooneymite]

You do not need to update the database monthly.

José      

 

This subject has been discussed and cussed since Pontius was a pilot!  After all the dust settles, it appears that it depends upon how the paperwork for your GPS reads.  One size does not fit all.

 

In the "Big Picture", it just makes sense that if the data has not changed, you should be able to use out-of-date data, but Garmin and the FAA are very clever at how they work the paper.

 

Of course, as long as you are not involved in an "event", who cares?

 

.

[Cruiser]

Jose your logic is sound but at is said above^ my Garmin GNS430W AFMS spcifically states that I must have a current database loaded in the unit or verify that the approach data is current. Instrument approaches must be accomplished in accordance with an approved instrument approach procedure that is loaded from the 400W series unit database.

 

How can I do that? Are you just pulling an IAP off the internet and checking to see if it has changed since you last updated your database? What do you do if it has?

[Piloto]

Jose your logic is sound but at is said above^ my Garmin GNS430W AFMS spcifically states that I must have a current database loaded in the unit or verify that the approach data is current. Instrument approaches must be accomplished in accordance with an approved instrument approach procedure that is loaded from the 400W series unit database.

 

How can I do that? Are you just pulling an IAP off the internet and checking to see if it has changed since you last updated your database? What do you do if it has?

 

I understand your dilemma but for me is what makes common sense, specially when spending my money. Just ask yourself

1. How many times have you done IFR approaches in actual IMC conditions in between updates.

2. How many different airports you fly in between database updates.

3. How many times have you seen frequency changes to airports you fly to in year.

 

I have a 530W and an Aera 560 with databases expired on both of them. And never had any issue operating them. To the airports that I regularly fly I am very familiar so I do not need a database update to tell me the same as the previous one did. In any case if you are under IMC you are going to be under ATC control and they will asign you the frequencies not the database. And most likely they will vector (or you can request) you to the final approach leg until you intercept. I have yet to see this leg alignment (runway aligned) change on any of the airports that I fly to. And there is the option of doing and ILS approach that requires no database update on your 430W or NAVCOM.

 

Maybe I am a wacko pilot but I am puzzle by so many obsessed of having their database updated at the end of the period. To me it just don't make sense. But it does to Jeppessen, they just got you addicted.

 

José

[Mooneymite]

Jose, I think it all has to do with "technical legality".

 

As I mentioned "big picture", as long as you don't have an incident/accident, no one will know, or care.  However, should something happen, everything gets looked at under a microscope.  As long as you are killed in the accident, you have nothing to worry about.   

[Piloto]

Jose, I think it all has to do with "technical legality".

 

As I mentioned "big picture", as long as you don't have an incident/accident, no one will know, or care.  However, should something happen, everything gets looked at under a microscope.  As long as you are killed in the accident, you have nothing to worry about.   

Just show me one NTSB report where the "probable cause" was due to an expired database.

 

José 

[Marauder]

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20080925X01531&ntsbno=CHI08FA282&akey=1 Note the comments on their examination of the currency of the charts... Sent using Tapatalk