tkatc

tkatc

Well Known Member
With more RVers entering the buyer's market, I figure there will be more guys wanting to modify thier purchase. I wonder if there should be a new forum section labeled "Buyers not Builders"... nah, we would probably be outcasts and more quickly identified. :)

Anyway, I am not IFR certified but I would pursue the certification if my plane was IFR. Without a MAJOR panel make-over, is there a way to convert this VFR panel to IFR?

photo.php
 
I get this error message:


This content is currently unavailable
The page you requested cannot be displayed right now. It may be temporarily unavailable, the link you clicked on may have expired, or you may not have permission to view this page.


-Jim
 
Hmm...I suspect it has something to do with posting from my iPad. I will have to go to the desktop to post properly.
 
Really simple.

Take all the money you have, and send it to Stein.:rolleyes:

You have seen the T shirts, havent you???
 
You could replace your moving map right in front of the pilot with a GRT HX or similar and be very close. Maybe the Advanced PFD?

Personally, I'd just start over 'cause I would rearrange things significantly for an IFR panel - since you already have a lot of the goodies, maybe that wouldn't be too expensive?
 
Looks like the only thing needed to be technically legal for is a VOR receiver with an indicator that displays glideslope. Adding an IFR GPS to that would give you more utility.

The flight instruments appear to be adequate, although the panel layout is a bit unusual. The tricky part may be to find places for the new radios without rearranging everything.
 
Read an article explaining basic requirements that cited several regulations that I did not fully dive into yet, but from what I understand, my plan would be as follows. Replace the second ASI with the existing VSI. That would free up space for a CDI. Then I would opt for the 430W, just have to find the room for that:confused:. I think this would be the path of least resistance as far as butchering the current panel while providing GPS capability.

My other concern is heated pitot as I believe that is also required. The article I read didn't spell this out but it is probably included in one of the referenced regs.

Anybody else have any thoughts on this (STEIN!)?
 
Tony, thanks for starting this thread. I'm thinkIng along the same lines. (The fog this morning was another reminder that the instrument ticket expands our operational envelope).

For me, it will be a whole new panel but I will be planning for "the basics" and looking for budget deals, last year's model, etc.
 
Remove the audio panel and Icom and replace it with a 430W
Remove the KMD and install a GRT Horizon or similar.
You could also get rid of the RH altimeter and G meter and put the KMD over there, or the second GRT screen :D
 
:D C'mon Walt! I'm trying to keep it simple. If I were going to do all that I would simply start over.
 
tkatc said:
My other concern is heated pitot as I believe that is also required.
Click to expand...

Nope, heated pitot and/or static not required...and neither is a VVI.

Check out 14 CFR Part 91.205 "?91.205 Powered civil aircraft with standard category U.S. airworthi- ness certificates: Instrument and equipment requirements" as the source information.

BTW, I've seen many glass panels with a backup analog VVI. Really? Why? Just don't get it.

-Jim
 
Keep it simple.... exactly. You have what looks like an ADI pilot, which has pitch I think, and you also have a TT turn coordinator (not sure what it's called). As long as they are powered by separate sources, or able to, you are all set in the gyro and backup area. You have airspeed, altitude, and V/S covered already. All you need is an acceptable navigation source with a selectable course deviation indication. I'm not sure you can show external nav info on your GPS - is it a King KMD 150? I can't tell from your picture what radios you have, but if you have an acceptable VOR receiver already, all you need is the CDI. You can use your Garmin handheld to navigate in IFR conditions if you are in a radar controlled environment, but you need to be able to navigate in an IFR approved way if ATC radar were to fail, hence an IFR capable VOR nav receiver or approved GPS. You may need a heated pitot as someone else has said - not sure. This would be a minimalist panel and one in which you'd probably want to limit your exposure to light IFR, depending on your experience and comfort level, but legal I think. Not being able to shoot an ILS, or a GPS approach (can't do one, legally, without an approach certified GPS), may limit where you can go. If you are not planning on flying a lot of IFR and have personal minimums that are a little below VFR, I don't see anything wrong with it. May get you home in a pinch if you're proficient, and who wants to fly a hot RV in hard IFR anyway??? Good luck with your choice and be sure to get plenty of practice with an experienced safety pilot before venturing out in the crud.
 
Don't forget DG and clock

91.205 also requires a clock with sweep second, and a "Gyroscopic direction indicator (directional gyro or equivalent)"

I'm sure some may disagree, but I don't think the ADI display of GPS track is equivalent to a DG. A Dynon D-10A might be worth it just for the HSI capability, but I'd be tempted to replace the existing MFD with a 7" EFIS.

If you don't need an IFR GPS, a SL-30 would probably fit in the same space as one of those ICOM radios.

Paige
 
PaigeHoffart said:
9

"Gyroscopic direction indicator (directional gyro or equivalent)"

I'm sure some may disagree, but I don't think the ADI display of GPS track is equivalent to a DG.
Click to expand...

Could be you're right, but the FAR is not exactly specific about this. It doesn't say the DG has to display magnetic heading.

Interestingly, 91.205 also requires:

8) Gyroscopic pitch and bank indicator (artificial horizon).

Note that the "or equivalent" language is missing; does this mean that none of the EFISs actually qualify (since they don't use gyroscopes)?
 
val 429

Replace the VSI with a VAL 429. I just recently did the same, although I already had a VOR without glideslope. The VAL will give you a VOR with stby feature plus a full INS (ILS and glideslope). This will fit in the same spot as your VSI, radio, indicators all in one package. It is nicely built and sells for $1895. I bought mine for $1695 with an OSH discount. The unit is solid and the switches are have the best feel of any I've seen. Number display is a bit hard to see in bright sunlight but ok. All in all, I think it's an outstanding deal and gets you basic IFR without a panel redo and $10,000 :rolleyes: Will let you fly in any IFR condition I'd want to be in, in an RV (mostly transition through clouds).
 
tkatc said:
:D C'mon Walt! I'm trying to keep it simple. If I were going to do all that I would simply start over.
Click to expand...

If that were my panel...

I would sell both the radios and replace them both with a dual NAV/COM stack like dual SL30's with corresponding CDI's.

I would pull the ADI, and replace it with a dynon D10 with battery back up. Should drop right into the current mount.

Done. You'll also have full redundancy.
 
Its hard

This is mine now:

IMG_4766.jpg


I had a lot of IFR experience before I made the RV-6A so I though I knew what I could get by with. I was wrong. The work load was terrific with one NAV radio with VOR/LOC/GS and no autopilot. I flew for a year that way before I started a series of changes I felt were necessary. I like instruments that have few dedicated functions and uncluttered displays. You need to get some experience with the kind of system you are considering before making you choices I believe. Maybe Stein can give you a setup that actually works for a single pilot IFR in a fast and maneuverable airplane based on the kind of equipment that your research tells you you want in your baseline.

Bob Axsom
 
Replace the VSI with an INS-429, and then replace the ADI with one of the Gemini's coming out next month so you have the VSI in that instrument. Done.

FWIW I just bought another INS-422 used on ebay for $430. They work fine as well.
 
RocketBob- can you interface either the INS-429 or the 422 to any of the modern autopilots? ie: track a VOR course, or a LOC course, or the ILS glideslope?
That'd be :cool:

What is the main difference between a 429 and 422?


rocketbob said:
Replace the VSI with an INS-429, and then replace the ADI with one of the Gemini's coming out next month so you have the VSI in that instrument. Done.

FWIW I just bought another INS-422 used on ebay for $430. They work fine as well.
Click to expand...
 
PaigeHoffart said:
I think all EFISs use gyroscopes... they just don't use the traditional spinning weight type, they use MEMS gyros http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibrating_structure_gyroscope
Click to expand...

Good point. Its true that people talk about "MEMS gyros", but I think this is similar to saying "icebox" when you mean refrigerator. Strictly speaking a gyroscope is a spinning mechanical device.

However, the FAA considers electronic EFISs to be acceptable replacements for gyros, according to this posting from the EAA site:

What is a gyro?

The often-asked question is, what constitutes a ?gyroscopic? instrument. Is an instrument containing an actual rotating mass gyro required, or are alternatives such as ring laser gyros or accelerometer-based instruments acceptable? Unfortunately, there is no specific definition of a gyroscopic instrument to be found in any FAA regulation or guidance document.

In order to try to answer this question, the EAA contacted the FAA Small Airplane Directorate in Kansas City, MO. The Small Airplane Directorate confirmed that there is no published guidance on this subject, but indicated that the function of the instrument is the main consideration. Any instrument that performs the function of the required gyroscopic instrument and presents info to the pilot in the same manner as the gyroscopic instrument will meet the requirement of 91.205, regardless of what mechanical or electronic means are used to generate the information and display.

My point in all of this is that 91.205 as written clearly has fallen behind the technology. The FAA appears to have moved past literal interpretation, at least in some instances.
 
PCHunt said:
RocketBob- can you interface either the INS-429 or the 422 to any of the modern autopilots? ie: track a VOR course, or a LOC course, or the ILS glideslope?
That'd be :cool:

What is the main difference between a 429 and 422?
Click to expand...

They have the standard 0-150mV output, so yes. 429 is a more modern version of the 422...have a look at valavionics.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.