What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Looking to switch from VFR to IFR

AttackPilot64

Well Known Member
My plane is currently certified VFR and I now want to certify it IFR CAPABLE I was looking for some insight i currently have a simple VFR PANEL and want to know the cheapest way to cert IFR. I don't plan on flying in the clouds much but it's nice to get "on top" when there's a layer. I mainly want gps since I currenty have THE DYNON sky-view system with full 2 axis autopilot to fly with ( I understand it's not "legal "per say ) but I'm very comfortable with it. Does anyone have any cost effective ways to be a legal /G ? Thanks in advance
 
My plane is currently certified VFR and I now want to certify it IFR CAPABLE I was looking for some insight i currently have a simple VFR PANEL and want to know the cheapest way to cert IFR. I don't plan on flying in the clouds much but it's nice to get "on top" when there's a layer. I mainly want gps since I currenty have THE DYNON sky-view system with full 2 axis autopilot to fly with ( I understand it's not "legal "per say ) but I'm very comfortable with it. Does anyone have any cost effective ways to be a legal /G ? Thanks in advance

Robert, you will no doubt receive many detailed replies to your inquiry, but let me get this started by painting with a broad brush and stating there is no regulatory path for "certifying" your RV for IFR. Please reference FAR 91.205 per your Operating Limitations to see a list of items you need for IFR operations. It is up to the pilot to assure equipment necessary to complete the IFR flight is in the aircraft. The equipment needed will depend on the procedures flown and your tolerance for redundancy. Sounds like you have a good start with the Dynon system already installed.

The only "certification" required is the transponder/encoder/pitot/static sign-off.
 
sam hit the legalities for the aircraft. to file /G you must have a nav unit that meets the TSO for /g ops. like a garmin 530 or the newer units like the 650.

bob burns
N82RB RV-4
 
sam hit the legalities for the aircraft. to file /G you must have a nav unit that meets the TSO for /g ops. like a garmin 530 or the newer units like the 650.

bob burns
N82RB RV-4

The /G is ANY TSO GPS that meets the approach requirements. The older (15-year old) unit I have meets the TSO for /G but requires that I also have a VOR which I have. Now you do need one of the newer GPS units what is TSO'ed with WAAS for GPS precision approaches but the older TSO Non-Precision approach GPS units will allow you to file /G.
 
The /G is ANY TSO GPS that meets the approach requirements. The older (15-year old) unit I have meets the TSO for /G but requires that I also have a VOR which I have. Now you do need one of the newer GPS units what is TSO'ed with WAAS for GPS precision approaches but the older TSO Non-Precision approach GPS units will allow you to file /G.

Gary hit the nail on the head! You can be legal for IFR, which much less capability in you're installed equipment. Not knowing what's in your panel today, you may very well be legal today. With that said, being legal, being capable of flying your mission types, and being safe are all different topics that you will need to take into consideration.

If you're not IFR rated today, these may be questions that you haven't yet acquired the skill set to answer yet. Of course you can solicit opinions of trusted advisors, but the answers really need to come from you. You are going to find that feedback on VAF will range from minimalists with basic, but legal instrumentation to those that have quadruple redundancy in everything. You need to determine what your budget and personal safety limits are to determine the appropriate place on that curve when you are flying in IMC.

There are other vendors that offer products that meet these requirements other than Garmin. Had the Avidyne unit been available when I purchased my avionics, I don't think I would have purchased the gtn-650.
 
I just went through this myself, similar thinking on what my actual IMC mission requirements were, similar panel setup (GRT). There is no cost effective way to go /G. I decided for myself that spending $200 on an IFR pitot static check and swapping my KX-125 for a GNC255 was the way to go, until the kids are out of college, anyway. Putting VFR GPS in the remarks section gets you most of the /G en route handling benefits.
 
The /G is ANY TSO GPS that meets the approach requirements. The older (15-year old) unit I have meets the TSO for /G but requires that I also have a VOR which I have. Now you do need one of the newer GPS units what is TSO'ed with WAAS for GPS precision approaches but the older TSO Non-Precision approach GPS units will allow you to file /G.

also true, but some older units are no longer supported for database updates, which limits, or in some cases, eliminates, there usefulness as an IFR unit. for useful IFR ops as /g you need something that is at least non-precision approach certified. the older units that were approved for enroute IFR will not help much anymore as more and more VOR, and NDB approaches are eliminated and replaced by GPS approaches.

my post was to point out that any unit that is used in /g must meet a tso for /g.

bob burns
 
Call Dynon

Because you already have a Dynon SkyView I suggest you call Kirk at Dynon. He can help you make the right decision as he is a CFII and has great knowledge on what would be required to fly IFR legally with the SkyView. Just call (425) 402-0433 and ask for Kirk.
 
My plane is currently certified VFR and I now want to certify it IFR CAPABLE I was looking for some insight i currently have a simple VFR PANEL and want to know the cheapest way to cert IFR. I don't plan on flying in the clouds much but it's nice to get "on top" when there's a layer. I mainly want gps since I currenty have THE DYNON sky-view system with full 2 axis autopilot to fly with ( I understand it's not "legal "per say ) but I'm very comfortable with it. Does anyone have any cost effective ways to be a legal /G ? Thanks in advance

Give me a call and I can talk over the different options.
 
I set my 6A up for IFR. I used an SL-30 for COM/NAV (expensive) and also got a KLN-90B (IFR Approach certified for non-precision) for $800. Both tie into my Dynon HS-34 and I use my D-100 for the Indicator/OBS.

I plan to get my IFR ticket in my 6A next spring, if I can ever figure out how to trim the pitch on this plane to fly level hands off without the autopilot :) The electric trim is SO sensitive.

Larry
 
Change the ratio.

Hey Larry,

Had the same issue with my trim system until I changed the ratio. I moved the servo drive shaft connection further away from the trim tab pivot point. I still had plenty of travel, but everything happened a little slower.

Lance
 
Hey Larry,

Had the same issue with my trim system until I changed the ratio. I moved the servo drive shaft connection further away from the trim tab pivot point. I still had plenty of travel, but everything happened a little slower.

Lance

That is a good idea. Did you have to make a new arm? My plane is painted and I wouldn't enjoy fab'ing and installing a new arm, as I would have to touch up the paint. I don't remember there being extra material to move the arm further out from the pivot point.

Larry
 
I plan to get my IFR ticket in my 6A next spring, if I can ever figure out how to trim the pitch on this plane to fly level hands off without the autopilot :) The electric trim is SO sensitive.

Larry

You've got the wrong autopilot. -:) The Trio Pro will adjust the trim speed depending on airspeed (faster airspeed, slower trim). And you can use it to hand-trim when the autopilot is disengaged.
You can also buy or build an adjustable, pulse-width modulated, speed control.
 
Regarding trim speed, when I built, I wired a momentary pushbutton next to the trim rocker switch. The pushbutton invokes a resistor that slows the trim motor. Hold the pushbutton and push the rocker (one handed).

In regards to IFR, two comments:

Please do not rely on the legal minimum equipment list to make you safe. Think about each and every instrument failing and how you would deal with it while in the soup.

Also, I do not like the idea "lite IFR". Its IFR or not. 1/2 way is BS. You have to be ready to go to minimums at any time. Some days you get surprised and you need to be on your game.
 
Comment, just Two cents

Regarding trim speed, when I built, I wired a momentary pushbutton next to the trim rocker switch. The pushbutton invokes a resistor that slows the trim motor. Hold the pushbutton and push the rocker (one handed).

In regards to IFR, two comments:

Please do not rely on the legal minimum equipment list to make you safe. Think about each and every instrument failing and how you would deal with it while in the soup.

Also, I do not like the idea "lite IFR". Its IFR or not. 1/2 way is BS. You have to be ready to go to minimums at any time. Some days you get surprised and you need to be on your game.

This last line is one that I think needs to be hi-lighted. It does happen more often than one mite think, that what you are briefed on and what you get once you are there are two different things. Very True, don't ask me how I know and why I am still here.
Yours as always, R.E.A. III #80888 Good Comment Bill if you come to 7A8 one day, the Soda is on me.
 
Last edited:
Also, I do not like the idea "lite IFR". Its IFR or not. 1/2 way is BS. You have to be ready to go to minimums at any time. Some days you get surprised and you need to be on your game.

Bill,
QUITE RIGHT! I agree 100%. This is the attitude that keeps pilots alive, and makes good pilots better. :cool:
 
Also, I do not like the idea "lite IFR". Its IFR or not. 1/2 way is BS. You have to be ready to go to minimums at any time. Some days you get surprised and you need to be on your game.

Is this to say you don't believe in Personal Minimums? It's as published or nothing?
 
Is this to say you don't believe in Personal Minimums? It's as published or nothing?

I agree with Bill. I think that personal minimums are a preflight criteria. For some it might be precision approach mins, for some something more akin to standard alternate mins. and for others might be something even higher. Regardless personal mins inform a go/no-go decision. Whatever your personal mins are once you launch, you have to be prepared fly it down to published mins and/or deviate as required as things frequently don't pan out in reality--weather is funny like that.
 
Thanks for all the replys, This subject always causes a bit of contention. I am comfortable IRF (alothough i will do some flying with a CFII in my plane once i certify it to ensure i am cofortable with my plane setup. I dont personally enjoy the clouds and like i mentioned earlier I really want to be IFR certified so that if i need to get above a cloud layer to get to my VFR airport i can. Its happend a couple times to me now where there is a ceiling where i am departing from and clear blue at my arrival airport.
 
I agree with Bill. I think that personal minimums are a preflight criteria. For some it might be precision approach mins, for some something more akin to standard alternate mins. and for others might be something even higher. Regardless personal mins inform a go/no-go decision. Whatever your personal mins are once you launch, you have to be prepared fly it down to published mins and/or deviate as required as things frequently don't pan out in reality--weather is funny like that.

Can't agree less.

Personal minimums apply for the entire flight. So, even if you launch while it looks 'okay' when you find out you're hedading below your personal minimums your going to an alternate. PERIOD.

Just as you would if your personal minimums ARE the published minimums, right?

Or do you say... I've never been comfortable flying down to 500' AGL on LOC approach, but here I am and it's the published min.. I better keep going. -meh
 
Last edited:
Or do you say... I've never been comfortable flying down to 500' AGL on LOC approach, but here I am and it's the published min.. I better keep going. -meh

No of course not. I get what you're saying and agree now that I think it through. The point I was trying to get across, albeit poorly, is you need to be prepared to execute the least favorable option. I see personal mins as a way to reduce but not eliminate risk. At the end of the day I simply don't believe in the concept of light IFR - for me either it's IFR or it isn't and if I file I'm prepared to execute all of the options every time. IOW there are no half measures.
 
At the end of the day I simply don't believe in the concept of light IFR - for me either it's IFR or it isn't and if I file I'm prepared to execute all of the options every time. IOW there are no half measures.

You might mean that it's either IMC or it isn't. And the point at which a pilot chooses to go missed is entirely their own decision. For some they'll break off at their personal minimums, for some they'll continue to the pavement.

The one who breaks off "early" will never be questioned. The one who continues on may be asked where he broke out and He'll use the oft quoted reply "Minumums" And only he will know how much of a risk he took.
 
Last edited:
At the end of the day I simply don't believe in the concept of light IFR - for me either it's IFR or it isn't and if I file I'm prepared to execute all of the options every time. IOW there are no half measures.

It's 100% true that you and your equipment should be ready for everything that IMC can entail, including an approach to minimums. That is why even though I am rated I don't fly IFR right now as I'm not current or comfortable.

However, this question has come up before and it seems like people forget that the original question was regarding equipment - and the truth is that what your PLANNED mission is will influence those choices. If you plan to commute in your plane and need to be ready to fly in nasty weather on a regular basis, my contention is that your plane should have a lot more in the way of capability than if your mission profile only includes much more conservative go/no-go planning, with an occasional hop through a narrow overcast at 6000'. That's not to say that you shouldn't equip that way if you want to and can afford it of course, just not that it would be essential.

Again, this is not to say that you should not be 100% comfortable and current enough to fly to minimums with your equipment, only that it would seem silly to equip your plane the same way as you might should your mission entail worse conditions.

Essentially, you end up with the cost vs safety curve, that we all have to find our own place on. Otherwise we are saying that the only responsible way to tackle any IMC is with $100k worth of avionics and gadgets.

In the end, each person needs to understand the rules, but also make the same cost/benefit analysis that we do at so many other points in our builds. Do you consider 2 radios essential to IFR? How about dual NAV sources? Synthetic vision? Autopilot? Electric trim? The list goes on and on, and only the builder/pilot can really make those decisions for himself. There are thousands of people out there flying IMC in 50 year old Cessnas with much less advanced, reliable technology than we have. In the end I think the OP would be quite capable with a GNS430W in addition to his Dynon setup.

Chris
 
Last edited:
You might mean that it's either IMC or it isn't.

Yes, but I used IFR in the context of "light IFR" -- no one ever says light IMC, or hard IMC. :rolleyes:

And the point at which a pilot chooses to go missed is entirely their own decision. For some they'll break off at their personal minimums, for some they'll continue to the pavement.

Absolutely - didn't say otherwise.

The one who breaks off "early" will never be questioned. The one who continues on may be asked where he broke out and He'll use the oft quoted reply "Minumums" And know one but him will know how much of a risk he took.

Huh? OK you left out you will also never be questioned going to published mins -- ever, even if the weather is below mins when you initiate the approach. Don't understand how flying beyond the DA/DH/MDA outside of 91.175 criteria became part of the discussion nor do I understand how that would justify breaking off "early" as a routine way to fly an approach which to me is what that paragraph implies.
 
I've been biting my tongue here but have decided to post. If you can honestly say you use personal minimums, in flight, to increase your safety margin (only) but are, in fact, perfectly capable of flying to published minimums, then I say that's fine. But for too many, 'personal minimums' is code for 'I'm rusty'. I'm tired of having pilots who fly ifr come to me for an IPC and say, "Well, I never actually fly to minimums, why must I do it now?" or "Do you really expect me to fly without using the autopilot?". Stuff happens. If you're flying IFR then you should be able to meet the standards of the instrument PTS.
 
Fair enough. I incorrectly extrapolated to the next behavior that once down to 600 - 1/2 I "might as well wait it out a bit." Those are the guys that should get questioned about what it looked like and they will say "minimums"

And to Bob - You are correct that personal minimums aren't an excuse. As Clint Eastwood said, "A man has to know his limitations."
 
Back
Top