VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

-POSTING RULES
-Advertise in here!
- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

Keep VAF Going
Donate methods

Point your
camera app here
to donate fast.

  #21  
Old 05-24-2014, 10:38 AM
Sig600 Sig600 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: KRTS
Posts: 1,798
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RV8iator View Post
Personal comfort level and familiarity with your equipment temper all these statements about single engine IFR.

There are a lot of pilots flying the Bonanza, Cirrus, 210, Corvallis, etc. that use their airplanes for so called HARD IFR. They didn't spend almost a million dollars to punch thru the clouds and go merrily on their way. I ask, what's the difference between theirs and ours if you realize we just flat DO NOT do ice and convective flying. You either trust it in the clouds or you don't.

For me, my airplane is a tool and I use it accordingly. It's equipped with multiple backup systems and I recognize its and MY limitations.

I do get a little peeved hearing it's not a suitable IFR platform. I have over 40 years of professional flying experience in the big stuff and fast stuff. It's a personal choice, not a mechanical one.

As for equipping it, legal and really usable are two vastly different expense levels.
It's a philosophical discussion, but I'll take a stab.

I think you just answered your own question. They have a half million dollars worth of airplane to do the job. I've flown all those you listed, minus the Corvalis, and they are much better IFR platforms than an RV. They have the panel size, the power, redundancy. With all those things, they still have the capacity to be useful.

If you want to empty your wallet to equip an RV as such, by all means. Mine is equipped as such, I'm starting to wish it wasn't. What I've come to find is that for a vast majority of the flying that people do with these airplanes, light and simple is what you want. Even just mechanically disconnecting the autopilot servos... the airplane handles just so much nicer. Sacrificing the beauty of how these planes fly, to load it up with thousands worth of gizmos you'll use a small percentage of the time.... like you said it's personal preference. If you want to equip yours as a tool to be used, go for it. I'm not saying you can't. The 8 however reminds me of, and has all the characteristics of a little fighter, and if I could make it 200 #'s lighter I would in a second. Mine is more of a toy that I'll use for small trips with the wife. The more I fly my 8, the more I realize I have less and less desire to fly it in the clouds/weather.

This is why I say build it, and decide later if you want the capability. When you realize what an amazing little airplane it is, you may not want to sacrifice all the things that make it great to load it up with IFR kit.

I didn't say it wasn't suitable. Suitable is determined by what is on the panel. However it's got such a light wing loading, and it's so light on the controls that a solid/stable platform it is not. All the things that make it such a beautiful airplane to fly.

Disclaimer, I haven't flown the 10 and statements don't apply. That was made to be more of a traveling family wagon.
__________________
Next?, TBD
IAR-823, SOLD
RV-8, SOLD
RV-7, SOLD
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-24-2014, 10:39 AM
apkp777's Avatar
apkp777 apkp777 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Schaumburg, IL
Posts: 2,053
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlen View Post
I've been flying IFR for nearly 25 years, and I have never put myself into a position anything close to the nightmare you describe. The capably-equipped RV (like mine) will handle the instrument conditions just fine. It's up to the PILOT -- not the plane -- to recognize his/her own limitations and abide by their own minimums...
Thankfully, most people will never have to face the challenge that I described. But, you do have to train and prepare for it. I have been in those conditions, fortunately it was with a crew and a jet. If I were setting up my RV for IFR there's no question that it would need to be equipped for that.

Most of the scenario is actually pretty easily managed. Autopilot with VNAV...dual independent PFD's (preferably different and isolated MFG's and Pitot/Static inputs), a third PFD with GPS/AHRS derived data, Throw in dual NAV/COM's, 2nd alternator, extra standby batteries, sick sack, and a good alternate or 2.

And most of all...REALLY good training and currency.
__________________
Tony Phillips
N524AP, RV 9 (tail wheel)
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-24-2014, 12:13 PM
Arlen's Avatar
Arlen Arlen is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: New Smyrna Beach, FL
Posts: 305
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by apkp777 View Post
Thankfully, most people will never have to face the challenge that I described. But, you do have to train and prepare for it. I have been in those conditions, fortunately it was with a crew and a jet. If I were setting up my RV for IFR there's no question that it would need to be equipped for that.

Most of the scenario is actually pretty easily managed. Autopilot with VNAV...dual independent PFD's (preferably different and isolated MFG's and Pitot/Static inputs), a third PFD with GPS/AHRS derived data, Throw in dual NAV/COM's, 2nd alternator, extra standby batteries, sick sack, and a good alternate or 2.

And most of all...REALLY good training and currency.
Tony,

I understand your points. My point is that I don't put myself in that position, i.e., I'm not flying if the forecast is anything remotely close to the ice and ceiling-minimums scenario you describe. When I had a SR22 and when I had a Bonanza, I flew them the same way. It's a personal choice. I choose to be conservative in my IFR flying. My RV is more than capable of doing what I need it to do.
__________________
Arlen
Donation to VAF 10.29.18
RV-6, February '14, SOLD December '15
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-24-2014, 02:44 PM
apkp777's Avatar
apkp777 apkp777 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Schaumburg, IL
Posts: 2,053
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlen View Post
Tony,

I understand your points. My point is that I don't put myself in that position, i.e., I'm not flying if the forecast is anything remotely close to the ice and ceiling-minimums scenario you describe. When I had a SR22 and when I had a Bonanza, I flew them the same way. It's a personal choice. I choose to be conservative in my IFR flying. My RV is more than capable of doing what I need it to do.

You are right Arlen, a good solid set of Personal Minimums should be the first step in IFR planning (and VFR also).
__________________
Tony Phillips
N524AP, RV 9 (tail wheel)
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-24-2014, 02:47 PM
BobTurner BobTurner is online now
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 7,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlen View Post
Tony,

I understand your points. My point is that I don't put myself in that position, i.e., I'm not flying if the forecast is anything remotely close to the ice and ceiling-minimums scenario you describe. When I had a SR22 and when I had a Bonanza, I flew them the same way. It's a personal choice. I choose to be conservative in my IFR flying. My RV is more than capable of doing what I need it to do.
Exactly. No one outside of the heavy iron world has training in flying close to thunderstorms - it's much too risky without real time weather, de-ice, second crew, etc. Avoiding them by a large margin is just common sense for typical GA aircraft.

Motels are for IFR flying, too.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-31-2014, 11:25 AM
sglynn's Avatar
sglynn sglynn is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Anacortes, WA
Posts: 828
Default IFR EFIS GPS vs Garmin EFIS Only Product

I currently fly Cherokee IFR with Garmin 430.

And a few pages back the pointed question of what certified equipment is needed for "legal" IFR and the answer included GPS.

So, I'm thinking why do I want EFIS with GPS since I've gotta have a Garmin 430 (or legal equivalent) anyway?

Isn't there a EFIS only product with auto pilot that will work with Garmin 430 and save me a few bucks on the price of the EFIS? Seems like all the EFIS makers are proud to include very cool GPS, maps, terrain, etc. But for legal IFR it can't be primary. It is just back up.

So in practice when I go fly IFR plan, I'll have to use the Garmin 430. My iPAD can do back. I need EFIS only solution coupled to 430.

Is there an EFIS only product out there?

thanks
__________________
Steve Lynn
RV-7A
Flying Phase I
Anacortes, WA
www.mykitlog.com/sglynn
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-31-2014, 11:31 AM
Radomir's Avatar
Radomir Radomir is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,524
Default

Steve, you wouldn't save any money with this stripped down product you're looking for.. plus terrain, and map are very nice features you actually really want to have As for internal GPS.. if it comes for free.. why not take it... Keep in mind these are cheap GPS'es (roughly $50 or so) so even if excluded, manufactures wouldn't really drop the price significantly.
__________________
Radomir
RV-7A sold
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-31-2014, 02:55 PM
BobTurner BobTurner is online now
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 7,170
Default

With the GRT their vfr gps is an option. Not very expensive, but you can save a few hundred dollars and go without it. That is what I did. I do have a G420w for ifr work. But some still just use vors and save more, with less capability. Your choice.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-31-2014, 03:20 PM
60av8tor 60av8tor is offline
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Harrisburg, Pa
Posts: 759
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sglynn View Post
So, I'm thinking why do I want EFIS with GPS since I've gotta have a Garmin 430 (or legal equivalent) anyway?
As has been said, the price difference is very little GPS/no GPS. Why I like it - I fly behind the Dynon Skyview, and even though I'm very happy the SV map now overlays my 430 route/approaches, I fly VFR much more often than IFR. Other than a simple direct to, the SV is much more friendly for on the fly changes/adjustments. What was very nice (before AOPA "upgraded" their online flight planner) is when I was able to save routes to a thumbdrive and load and go - can't do that with a 430 - not easily anyway.

Unfortunately I can't find anything free that will export .GPX
__________________
Jon
RV-7A purchased flying - Sold 6/16
RV-10 empennage delivered 1/22/14 (325JT)

Build: http://hhav8or.blogspot.com/
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-31-2014, 05:28 PM
sglynn's Avatar
sglynn sglynn is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Anacortes, WA
Posts: 828
Default EFIS Only or Legal EFIS GPS for IFR

Yea you hit the point. If the EFIS makers couldn't sell EFIS only for much less price than current models with GPS then I guess EFIS with GPS is what we get and add a Garmin 430 (or equivalent) for "legal" IFR.

Course this begs the question, couldn't EFIS GPS be deemed legal IFR for experimentals? They work just as good, maybe better. And I'll bet they would pass the same test criteria. Seems inconsistent that experimentals can have non-certified equipment, but when it comes to GPS, it doesn't count. Do VOR receivers have to be "Certified" for legal IFR in an experimental? I don't think so? So why do GPS'es have to be "certified" in experimentals? But I guess this is a question for the government, FAA etc,. Maybe over time this will change.

thanks
__________________
Steve Lynn
RV-7A
Flying Phase I
Anacortes, WA
www.mykitlog.com/sglynn
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:33 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.