Close

Member Login

Logging In
Invalid username or password.
Incorrect Login. Please try again.

not a member? sign-up now!

Signing up could earn you gear and it helps to keep offensive content off of our site.

Garmin 796: We Fly It First

By Robert Goyer / Published: Sep 14, 2011
Rate it! 62% or 38%

The screen, of course, is the thing, and the 796’s 7-inch-diagonal LCD is bright and its touch screen is responsive in just the right way, knowing, seemingly, exactly what your intentions were, where you meant to touch and whether the contact was an accidental brush or a real command. One of the big selling points of the iPad is its great screen, and while the 796 can’t compete in terms of sheer size, it fits beautifully in the cockpit, better in some instances than the iPad, which can be a handful in tight spaces.

The Garmin 796 is meant to be wired, so a permanent placement in the cockpit is best, though it takes only a few moments to plug and place if you’re in a rented or shared airplane, as I was when I tested mine. The battery life is good enough for a long cross-country leg, but not good enough to go without the power cord in most cases. You’ll also be plugging in the XM antenna. The GPS antenna, at least in the Cirrus, was completely unnecessary. The built-in antenna worked flawlessly. Still, with a semi-permanent installation, you can route wires behind panels and use cord clips to keep things uncluttered.

The 796 isn’t really a handheld, but in a pinch you could use it as one. It can be mounted to the side window, which I did in the Cirrus, or worn on a kneeboard, which I didn’t try. The back of the unit is contoured, so it will sit quite nicely on one knee. Simply put the unit into the portrait view mode, and you’ve got a next-generation kneeboard. Many pilots will mount the unit to the yoke, which is what I would do if the Cirrus had a yoke. In portrait mode, which I greatly preferred, the 7-inch screen is absolutely perfect. Even the approach charts, which I thought would look too small on the 796’s screen, were just right.

Being a dedicated unit, the Garmin 796 has one advantage over the iPad: dedicated keys. Along the bottom of the screen, or to the side, depending on which way you have the unit configured, there are big backlit keys for escape (to go back a screen), menu, direct to, and nearest. I found myself using some keys, like menu and escape, a lot and the direct to and nearest keys very little. I’m curious to hear how other pilots do it.

In terms of software, the killer app on the 796 is synthetic vision, which Garmin, for its portable products, refers to as 3-D vision. Arrayed around a sharp and smooth synthetic vision window are an airspeed tape (groundspeed, actually), an altitude tape (again, GPS altitude) and, along the top, a heading (track) indicator reference. While pilots flying steam gauge airplanes might be tempted to rely on the 796 for attitude, they are cautioned against doing that. It is not an attitude-based system; it derives its position information from GPS. If steam gauges are your thing, there’s also Garmin’s already well-known “panel page,” which shows a cluster of virtual flight instruments with its information derived, again, from GPS. There is, as with other Garmin portables, great terrain awareness, with obstacles, TAWS-like color-coding of terrain and GPS altitude readouts.

You can even connect the 796 to TIS traffic, to give it yet another handy safety feature that displays on the 3-D vision, very much as it does on Garmin’s panel-mount hardware. Indeed, connectivity is a strong suit of the 796. Many owners of Experimental airplanes will mount the Garmin 796 in the panel and connect it to a traffic sensor.

There are a lot of things the 796 can do, though most of those features are available on the iPad through one app or another, though not in a form as easy to use or as elegant as on the 796. Most of them, in fact, can be found in Garmin’s own iPad app, Pilot My-Cast.

Comments (6) Post a comment

All Comments

Mike Mendenhall's picture

Wow, the Adventure Pilot iFly 700 does most of this (OK, no synthetic vision) with a 7" touch screen, full IFR low level charts, geo-referenced plates and diagrams, rubberband (drag and drop) flight plan re-route and ADS-B weather and traffic support. And yet it cost under $600.00. Oh, and the anual subscription is only $89.00 for unlimited updates.

How about a review of this unit?

Don Parker Bazemore's picture

Being somewhat new in to the world of flying, I can already see the two schools. Old and new. Technology for aviation is indeed a God sent. With the latest in avionics and flight control systems,flying to me has taken one of greatest leaps in development.
For me principles are the keys to the bonds of good foundations. This new product by Garmin is an excellent performer. From my skimreading of the artical I can see this device does a great job for navigation.
I am also quite sure that there are many veteran polits who are little mystify by this unit being portable. Be it the yoke, the joy stick or the throttle control there is little else my hands would want to be grabing on to. I am going to stick to what is built into the plane. I for one do not see the need for any portable devices in the cockpit.
The Garmin devise would be great as back up unit. Again for me I prefer all instrutmentation in front of me on the panel. Of course there's the excellent performance of "heads up" display. Now thats something that can really go places!

ejmeer's picture

While others may complain about the 796 and its $2499 price tag I for one decided to upgrade from my 696. I too have an iPad with both Foreflight and Wing-X and while I love my iPad and all the flight planning I can do with it, simply put its too large for my single engine cockpit and thus I only use it to confirm information I can get from the 696. The other important fact to keep in mind is that for $2499 I get an amazing navigation device that just works, is able to receive all XM weather products and comes with an XM receiver. Please go and look to see how much it costs just to buy an XM receiver. To add weather to your iPad, you could get the ADS-B weather offered by Wing-X but it has incomplete coverage of the United States and offers only a small subset of the weather products that XM does. How about XM for the iPad? Yes you can go by the Baron's Mobile but with the required XM weather receiver that bundle will set you back $1200 and you will still need the monthly subscription. Not to mention there isn't a single iPad app that has actually implemented XM weather.
Again I agree the iPad is an amazing device that I always bring with me as a backup to my garmin. But Garmin has had time to perfect their navigation devices and software, I don't need an extra GPS dongle to get 5Hz GPS, I get digitized Maps rather than just raster scanned maps that aren't always the best and most importantly I get reliable weather in the cockpit. I choose to go the portable route because I can easily upgrade and the cost of panel mounts with installation is obscene. If the people behind Foreflight and WingX can get the iPad to perform like my Garmin than I would sell the Garmin in a heartbeat, but so far their applications are still way behind what garmin has to offer.

donkaye's picture

I think I have bought every portable Garmin Aviation GPS since the first Garmin 90 came out. Each one has reliably provided more capability than the last. The last 4 or 5 upgrades have not cost too much because of the value received from the sale of the previous version. The same holds true for the 796. Unlike a previous comment, for me a portable GPS in the cockpit is a must. As a Flight Instructor, I am constantly flying in different airplanes with different types of equipment in different parts of the country. Not all of them have panel mounted GPS, although that is becoming rarer these days. Many especially don't have in panel weather. To me in the interest of safety this is a "must have" for every serious pilot, and I like the portability of taking that capability with me. Garmin's unified aviation and weather products just work with minimal interface issues. That's worth a price premium to me. The iPad is an exceptional tool, too, and I think I have put most aviation apps on mine. Mine has enabled me to comfortably go paperless. In the end, however, my Garmin GPS is my primary "go to" unit in the cockpit.

iused2fly's picture

Do I think the '796' is really cool? Sure. Is the little "airplane in the window" synthetic vision display a neat feature to have if you just flew into IMC inadvertently and need to do a 180 ASAP? Definitely. Would most people, most of the time, be better off by putting the cash in the bank for rainy day? Absolutely. Would I rather spend the $2500 on, say, a mode S transponder or a newer Nav/Com or some other instrument/radio/bell and whistle if i owned a plane? Probably. Do these expensive portables makes our' flight bags an even more attractive target for thieves who hang around airports and pilots' lounges? Absolutely. Ladies and gentlemen, we are now officially in the era of the $3000+ flight bag, which is way easier to rip off than a used car.

By the way, how did any of us get from A to B before stuff like the Garmin Aero 796 existed? Even nowadays good pilotage plus a compass and a stopwatch will get you from A to B with reasonable accuracy.

While technology is great, there are always unintended issues with them that aren't apparent at first. The emergence of Garmin as the choice for aircraft avionics has weakened long standing avionics manufacturers like King, Bendix and Collins to the point that they had to merge to survive. The result: reducing competition in the avionics business. And the G-1000 was, IMHO, too complex, difficult to find certain pages and an expensive learning curve.

On the other hand, with continuous new developments in technology you get game changers like when GNS series of NAV?COM?GPS caught on in the late 1990s and when the G-1000 caught arrived in 2002/2003. But with continuous new development we also get shorter product "lives", what with the next big improvement always just around the corner. If you are the guy who bought a Wichita span can in 2007, don't you wish you waited until synthetic vision and the G-2000 system came out before signing that big cheque? This is different than it was during the period I flew from 1970-95, when the only real changes to our planes were better ELTs, switching to flip/flop NAVCOMs like KX-155s and upgrading our transponders to mode C from mode A.

Call me a dinosaur but I never really got what was so great about some aspects of the G-1000. While I liked the fully integrated systems that G-1000 offered, I never found the mega attitude indicator or vertical strips for ASI and Alt/VSI particularly compelling. And doing common tasks which IFR and VFR pilots do repeatedly, like that slewing feature for entering waypoints in G-1000 and GNS 530/430, looked like it was designed by some guy who never had to enter or amend a flight plan while bouncing around in turbulence. Fortunately the newer architecture in the G-2000/3--, GTN 750/650 and this new Garmin796 looks much easier to learn and operate. Given the new G-2000, the GTN 750/650 and this new Garmin portable, the guy who bought his G-1000/G-530-equipped Cessna must think his plane's avionics have already sunk to "second generation status" in just four years!

And why is it so hard to bring an inexpensive flight deck to the market, anyway? The G-1000 is, after all, just a couple of over-priced flat panels, plus overpriced software plus a couple of overpriced hardware modules plus wires, sensors etc.

When are we going to get past this proprietary model for things involving technology in aviation? If the G-1000's software had been designed to be open source from the get-go, a great many talented software writers and hardware developers might have already advanced the digital flight deck to the point where we have two-way data link with ATC instead of two-way radio. We could be working towards eliminating repeated radio calls to ATC for normal activities like station passages, mandatory reporting points, transitioning from enroute to a STAR and even final approaches and just pressing a key or two instead. Each aircraft could have its own, dedicated transponder code, for use in all situations in all classes of airspace. We'd no longer have to switch frequencies to talk or squawk while focused on flying safely in high collision hazard areas, close to airports. The radio frequency could be left for more important things like announcing emergency situations. While we'd miss that radio chatter, especially prior to entering busy airspace, we'd have a quieter cockpit. TCAS plus inputs from ATC could help us avoid conflicts with other aircraft. Even takeoff and landing clearances could be accomplishes without two-way radio.

There is so much more we could do with computers and flat panels flight decks. Right now the compelling area for more research and development seems to be finding more band width for uploading data to the aircraft. When we see real improvement in that area we'll be on the verge of the next "great improvement" in how we navigate and operate light airplanes.

Douglas M
Surrey, British Columbia

KentMagnuson's picture

I have been flying with the Garmin 696 in our 2 company aircraft and still prefer that unit. I flew with the G796 for a week and gladly sent it back. In my opinion, data input is slower and require more motions, etc. The map page only holds 4 data fields, compared with 12 available on the G696. The Syn-Vis looks pretty cool enroute, but on approach and right up to touchdown, the runway displayed off my left wing. At touchdown, the runway centered. The only thing I did like was the detailed enroute charts, which the G696 does not have.

Top Rated

Your Comment
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
All submitted comments are subject to the license terms set forth in our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use