Ultranomad wrote:
Strictly speaking, any GPS should be capable of PRNAV. If it is not PRNAV approved, it’s not by design, it’s by lack of effort to procure the approval.
Not correct. PRNAV (or RNAV 1) requires that the SID or STAR be loadable from the database. Some SIDs require a CF type leg in the database and many of the older GPS systems such as the KLN94 don’t support the leg type in the database. So unless the design was changed to add the support for the CF type leg in the data base, it could never be approved, no matter how much effort is expended. The earliest GPS system that complies with the requirements is the legacy GNS430. The KL90B, KLN89B, KLN94, and all the Garmin units such as the GNC300XL, the Apollo units, etc don’t comply.
Airborne_Again wrote:
It does? Do you have any details?
See table 8 for Garmin
NCYankee wrote:
AC 90-100 Compliance tableSee table 8 for Garmin
Thanks!
A mystery in this “paper mechanism” is that the KLN94 (and possibly the KLN90B which while older is in some respects more advanced e.g. having an ARINC429 roll steer output) has all the individual waypoints for RNAV SIDs & STARs in its database, but not the tracks connecting them 
Hence:
But then we are looking at King being on the verge of disintegration (in terms of most smart people having left the company, many of them to Garmin) when this box came out.
Garmin made sure they had the more complete database, as well as 8.33. Two quite clever bits of foresight!
