VFR/IFR/regs question.

[John Courte]

Since I'm still building the emp (after all this time), I've got some flex in the panel planning, but I I have a couple of questions aimed at the TC's, DARs, CFI's and experienced builders.

1. Can I plan for a VFR Day/Night setup just to get it flying and upgrade to an IFR solution later? How difficult is the retrofit? I'd go with a BMA EFIS/One and AP, ideally. For backup, maybe a Dynon D-10 and some analog gauges for engine monitoring. I'm not terribly interested in steam gauges, I'd like to avoid them if possible, but I need the minimum to stay upright and pointed in the proper direction if I get into trouble with the fancy stuff. I understand that building the capability in at the beginning is much easier than retrofitting, but the cost in time of another five years in the garage appeals to me much less than not having IFR capability. I dont' have an IFR ticket yet anyway. Which brings me to question 2:

2. I want to get my IFR ticket in this airplane. How realistic is that? From go, it would seem like I need a full dual-control setup to receive any kind of instruction. But am I going to be renting time at a flight school while getting the IFR cert? Or is it as simple as finding an instructor willing to ride with me in my own ship?

I realize this sounds like a memo from the Poor Planning Commission, but I'm interested in fallback for scenarios involving changes in funding or schedule, and I want to get as much info as possible. I'll also be the first to admit I'm fairly ignorant of the process, but I'm pretty clear on the mission, which is light aerobatics, maybe some formation (I was never crazy about relative work in skydiving, maybe flying is different), and a viable XC platform to get me around the Southwest and Northwest with the occasional long trip to MI or FL.

THanks in advance.
-john

[Mike S]

I am planning on a fairly simple panel, VFR + , but am leaving the option open to go IFR at some time in the future.

I think it is a good idea to build in "Up-gradability".

The state of the art in avionics changes so fast that you cant reasonable spec/design a panel while still at the tail building stage.

Set your paramaters, yes, and start gathering info/knowledge.

Even if you dont get the IFR ticket, should you want to sell sometime in the future, it will be an advantage to have the "Up-gradability" factor built in to the A/C.

Mike

[airguy]

I'm planning on pretty much the same mission scenarios, but I'll be building in a 2-axis AP and IFR panel from the word go, simply for "just in case".

[az_gila]

John,
If you go modular with your panel, such as this commercial one...

http://www.affordablepanels.com/the_panel.htm

...or make your own equivalent... any future upgrades will be easier to do.

Make sure that your radio stack will pull out towards you as a whole (not by the individual rack) and rear stack wiring will be easier to change in the future.

A connector on the inputs to your audio panel would probably be useful to, since most of the stack wires go to other avionics, the audio connections (PTT, mic., headset, etc..) go away from the panel.

I would wait... better electronics will be available in the future, and probably (I hope!) cheaper.

gil in Tucson... bought too early, anyone want to buy a Terra digital transponder?....

[hevansrv7a]

I was not planning to make my -7A aerobatic. My DAR advised me that it's very hard to get a change in the operating limits. I am not sure if this applies to IFR, but be sure to check it before you decide. You don't get the IFR certification from the DAR, though, you get it the same as with any other airplane, from an avionics guy.

[Low Pass]

Originally Posted by John Courte

1. Can I plan for a VFR Day/Night setup just to get it flying and upgrade to an IFR solution later?

Yes. Just make sure your operating limitations include night VFR and/or IFR from the beginning. I believe that's the way it's to be worded.

How difficult is the retrofit?

This is totally dependent upon the nature of your retrofit. I'm on my second complete panel and have plans for a 3rd. Rearranging the panel (with an -8) is pretty straighforward.

I'm not terribly interested in steam gauges,

Then you *may* have issues finding an examiner to fly with you on your check ride and a CFII to instruct you. I urge people to learn with a std instrument stack, the move to non-std after the rating.

2. I want to get my IFR ticket in this airplane. How realistic is that?

If you go witha std configuration, then I believe it's very doable. With a non-std, glass panel, etc., as mentioned above, I believe you may have significant challenges. In this case, you might be better off getting the rating in a nice, stable (Cessna) spam can.

From go, it would seem like I need a full dual-control setup to receive any kind of instruction.

Not necessarily. Only if you need the instructor to act as PIC (real IMC) before you're rated.

Regardless, try to get at least an artificial horizon in your panel. RV's are very unforgiving in IMC. Deadly with no attitude indicator.

CFII/MEI

[gmcjetpilot]

Originally Posted by Low Pass

I urge people to learn with a std instrument stack, the move to non-std after the rating.

If you go with a std configuration, then I believe it's very doable. With a non-std, glass panel, etc., as mentioned above, I believe you may have significant challenges.

In this case, you might be better off getting the rating in a nice, stable (Cessna) spam can.

Regardless, try to get at least an artificial horizon in your panel. RV's are very unforgiving in IMC. Deadly with no attitude indicator.

CFII/MEI

I am CFII/MEI and a little old fashion. I agree with most but not sure you need to learn a standard "T-ee" or Six-Pak configuration. EFIS is really not different than mechanical gauges, the info is the same, just displayed differently. In fact EFIS displays (good ones) emulate the standard "T", its just presentation compactly. I like a FULL compass rose heading display (DG) verses just the upper arc or quadrant, but you get use to it.

Granted you don't have to move your eyes as far with EFIS as analog, but the concept of attitude instrument flying is the same.

I taught many pilots transitioning from early generation jets to later EFIS Boeing aircraft in 89-93, when EFIS was making an impact. Most of the crews I taught had no EFIS experience. It does take a little getting use to but the transition was painless and of course they embraced it. Believe me there was a LOT of anxiety of the old timers who had flown for 30 years with analog gauges going to EFIS. By the end of the course it was mostly all smiles.

Now going the other way EFIS to analog, granted there is a transition there as well. If going back to say an analog C-172, it would be wise to get some practice, simulator or aircraft training with an instructor before flying IMC. However if you have developed a "Good Scan" and really mastered the art of "attitude instrument flying", the gauges really don't make much difference. Most kids today are super comfortable with video displays and computers, so button pushing is normal. For the old timers, don't fear the glass. I recently got to fly an OLD B747 sim. It flew just like a plane. I could figure out how to fly even with the old stuff. At the large airlines with mixed generations of jets, you can go from EFIS to jurassic. It's just not a big issue, its a small issue.

Analog flight instruments are going the way of NDB or Loran. Keep in mind many EFIS have basically within their display a standard 6-pak or "T-ee". Some old old planes, like the Piper Apache I owned or old Bonanzas had the shot gun approach to instrument placement, Pre 6-Pak. Granted the EFIS scan is simplified because its all there, but teaching: cross-check, interpret, control is still the same. The principles of: hub and spoke, controlling-monitoring, primary-secondary, performance-trend and instrument principles are the same. Bad things about mechanical gyros like precession and acceleration errors are gone with EFIS. On the other hand some of the experimental EFIS have there own idiosyncrasies. A certified EFIS is arguably superior in every way to mechanical gyros.

I would not get too worried about the EFIS issue. I agree once you go EFIS you will not want to go back to spinning wheels and gyro precision.

Now the advice of having a back up attitude indicator is a good one. The back up does not have to be analog, but its highly recommend you have mechanical pitot static airspeed and altitude and one gyro, preferably an attitude instrument. The gyro can be analog or EFIS. I think what LOW PASS is saying is just a simple turn coordinator as a back up can be a challenge to fly on in a RV. Most agree an Auto Pilot is a must for single pilot IFR ops in a fast plane like a RV. This "partial panel" skill (needle-ball & airspeed) is important. However flying with an attitude indicator is easier. How you power the gyro, vac or elect it another debate.

Vac is old news and lost favor, but had it's pros and cons, but mostly con. If you do build an all electric IFR plane you will get into system redundancy. That my be something you want to think of when building, like where will you put a second battery when you upgrade to IFR.

Part of instrument training is flying with the back-up only, "needle ball and airspeed". In the past that was just a rate-of-Turn instrument (Turn coordinator or Turn bank) plus two pitot static instruments, air-speed and altitude. So if outfitting your EFIS plane for true IFR training you should have at least a back-up TC/T&B, airspeed and altitude. The FARS do NOT have requirements for back-ups and independant sources of instrument power, only air-transport category planes have these requirements. However I would not personally teach a pilot in an experimental in actual IMC without back up instruments. Also I want all my students to get real IMC before taking the check ride. There is no hood or foggles that can substitute for flying in the "Goo". It is a totally different thing when you can't peek.

To the original question, you did not mention RV type? Obviously side by side is the only way to go. A RV-8 and dual training in IMC would not be kosher unless you had dual controls and instruments, which is unlikely, but that is up to the CFII.

LOW PASS I hear what you are saying but the EFIS thing is not a big deal. In fact most new planes, Cirrus, Lancair, Diamond, Cessna the list goes on have EFIS, about 15-20 years after all airliners and regional commuters started to go all EFIS. Southwest was one of the last to transition to EFIS. They resisted to the last, wanting to keep all their planes the same, new and old. They eventually had to go to EFIS because Boeing stopped making analog display cockpits. When Southwest got their EFIS they had it programed to display replicas of analog gauges. They even covered up VNAV (vertical navigation) buttons on the autopilot and did not use the auto throttles! The idea was to make the "New Gen" B737's work just like an old classic and jurassic B737-200's. They gave up and enabled the "magic" and let the pilots use it.

So the topic of Analog/EFIS traning and transition is not trivial but its not a big deal either. I guess it depends on the CFII's experience and comfort. Good instrument skill is good skill. A good scan is a good scan and good control is good control. If a student's performance is poor its probably a defect in their skill not the instruments, basics are basics regardless.

[John Courte]

It's an RV-7 tip-up, 180hp O360. So far. should have mentioned that..

[Sam Buchanan]

I was not planning to make my -7A aerobatic. My DAR advised me that it's very hard to get a change in the operating limits. I am not sure if this applies to IFR, but be sure to check it before you decide. You don't get the IFR certification from the DAR, though, you get it the same as with any other airplane, from an avionics guy.

This is a very common misunderstanding. You do not get IFR certification for an experimental aircraft from an "avionics guy". The reason this is true is that there is no such thing as "IFR certification" for an experimental aircraft. The ability to operate under instrument rules comes from the operating limitations of the aircraft, and they state that IFR ops are legit as long as the aircraft is properly equipped for the particular IFR flight. The pilot makes that determination, not an Avionics guy or DAR.

If the quote was in reference to the pitot certification, then yes, an avionics shop can provide that service.

As far as updating the op lims, the process is pretty straightforward. If wanting to add aerobatic flight to the op lims, the builder can do that without intervention from the FAA.

[Davepar]

Originally Posted by Sam Buchanan

The pilot makes that determination, not an Avionics guy or DAR.

Pilot or builder? I thought it was builder.