Certified vs Non-certified avionics?

[cocolos]

I've been pricing avionics for my build I will start relatively soon. What's the difference between certified and non-certified avionics? Can a home building install either or do the certified ones need to be done by a shop even if it's being put on an experimental. Thanks for the info.

 

[kyleb]

I've been pricing avionics for my build I will start relatively soon. What's the difference between certified and non-certified avionics? Can a home building install either or do the certified ones need to be done by a shop even if it's being put on an experimental. Thanks for the info.

As a homebuilder, you can install whatever you want.

Enjoy.

 

[Todd Copeland]

True, you can do what ever you want but if you want a certified IFR gps it still needs to be a certified unit. I was planning dynon glass in my Glasair but I want IFR gps capability and their gps does not qualify, I still needed a certified gps and my preference is garmin. Ultimately I chose to go with the G3X system with auto pilot waas gos and everything. Nothing else can touch the combination for the money in my opinion.

 

[Geico266]

The only difference is the price and what is available. The choices for experimental avionics is a lot better. Many vendors don't offer certified versions due to the cost of certification. They are very capable systems, and look cool too.

What are you looking at? Take a hard look at Garmin's new experimental offerings. Very competitive and full of Garmin features.

 

[hindsight2020]

what are ya building?

 

[frfly172]

The home building market is the future ,just look at what garmin is offering.

 

[cocolos]

I see. I'll probably go with G3X system.

I am building a Lancair 360.

 

[Neal Howard]

I see. I'll probably go with G3X system.

I am building a Lancair 360.

Excellent choice for such a fast ship. The new Garmin autopilot servos for the G3X system have the added benefit of electric clutches that mechanically disconnect their motors from the flight controls so you feel no drag in the stick's movement when the A/P is disengaged.

 

[coma24]

cocolos, not avionics related, but you're lucky enough to be not far from Chris Zavatson...one of the most prolific contributors to the Lancair community. You might want to consider his plenum configuration and the mods he's made to the landing gear system to improve the reliability (both are quite simple).

fwiw, I have a 360 and have a standard 6 pack with a Garmin 420 (used to be a 430 2 owners ago, but they swapped it out for a 420 then sold the airplane and used the 430 in their other plane). I fly it IFR most of the time and enjoy it a great deal.

I'm not suggesting you replicate my ancient configuration, I know glass is the way of the future, for better or worse Just letting you know that there is another IFR 360 out there if you ever need to talk.

 

[JoeSelch]

Another consideration - as it sounds like you haven't started building yet - is that the state of the art is advancing so rapidly, you might want to wait awhile before locking yourself into anything.

I know at least one builder with new-in-box Blue Mountain gear collecting dust. And they're STILL not at the point of needing it for installation.

 

[tsts4]

Another consideration - as it sounds like you haven't started building yet - is that the state of the art is advancing so rapidly, you might want to wait awhile before locking yourself into anything.

I know at least one builder with new-in-box Blue Mountain gear collecting dust. And they're STILL not at the point of needing it for installation.

Excellent advice. I'll go one further and say that avionics should be your last major purchase after the entire kit and engine, and don't buy until you are close to the install point. I have a 2-screen G3X, GTN 650, SL 30, PMA 5000, GTX23ES, TruTrak GX Pilot AP, TruTrak Gemini Backup PFD, and VP-200 electrical system and could have saved myself a few thousand dollars had I waited as the prices dropped over time, and in the case oh the VP-200 it became obsolete and discontinued since I purchased it first back in 2008.

Also look at GRT, Dynon, and AFS as they all make solid EFIS systems. Although, I prefer a standalone AP control head for redundancy, I believe they all, to include Garmin, have the option of controlling the AP servos directly by the EFIS (AFS may be the lone exception but I'm not sure).

 

[kyleb]

Excellent advice. I'll go one further and say that avionics should be your last major purchase after the entire kit and engine, and don't buy until you are close to the install point. QUOTE]

Yep. I see new builders make the "premature panel plan/buy" mistake all the time. "I just bought my empennage kit and was thinking XXX, YYY in my panel, and ....".

Stop. Forget the panel. Build the tail, the wings, the fuselage. Buy your engine, hang it. Fit the cowl. Start on the canopy.

Now, it is time to think about your panel. Wait. Maybe you should design your paint scheme first...

There are a lot of guys out there who have a panel that is a generation older or more expensive than what they could have bought if they hadn't gone off early on designing/buying the panel..

 

[cocolos]

cocolos, not avionics related, but you're lucky enough to be not far from Chris Zavatson...one of the most prolific contributors to the Lancair community. You might want to consider his plenum configuration and the mods he's made to the landing gear system to improve the reliability (both are quite simple).

fwiw, I have a 360 and have a standard 6 pack with a Garmin 420 (used to be a 430 2 owners ago, but they swapped it out for a 420 then sold the airplane and used the 430 in their other plane). I fly it IFR most of the time and enjoy it a great deal.

I'm not suggesting you replicate my ancient configuration, I know glass is the way of the future, for better or worse Just letting you know that there is another IFR 360 out there if you ever need to talk.

Yes I've seen his it is very nice. It's probably one of the main reasons what got me thinking about building one. By the way keep up the great YouTube videos.

 

[cocolos]

Excellent advice. I'll go one further and say that avionics should be your last major purchase after the entire kit and engine, and don't buy until you are close to the install point. QUOTE]

Yep. I see new builders make the "premature panel plan/buy" mistake all the time. "I just bought my empennage kit and was thinking XXX, YYY in my panel, and ....".

Stop. Forget the panel. Build the tail, the wings, the fuselage. Buy your engine, hang it. Fit the cowl. Start on the canopy.

Now, it is time to think about your panel. Wait. Maybe you should design your paint scheme first...

There are a lot of guys out there who have a panel that is a generation older or more expensive than what they could have bought if they hadn't gone off early on designing/buying the panel..

I see I will take your advice and wait. Thanks!

 

[airguy]

In my RV, I ran full Dynon glass with a Garmin 430W for IFR. If you want to use a coupled autopilot at any point, you have to get your vertical nav data from a certified device to feed to the autopilot (anybody can/will feed horizontal data, only vertical requires certified). To fly an IFR approach, you need a certified receiver for the type of approach flown (ILS/GPS). On top of that, starting 2020 ADSB is going to require a certified GPS receiver to feed position to the transponder.

Bottom line - use whatever you like in the experimental panel, but plan on having a certified GPS receiver in there somewhere, brand and model of your choice.

 

[DaleB]

True, you can do what ever you want but if you want a certified IFR gps it still needs to be a certified unit. I was planning dynon glass in my Glasair but I want IFR gps capability and their gps does not qualify, I still needed a certified gps and my preference is garmin. Ultimately I chose to go with the G3X system with auto pilot waas gos and everything. Nothing else can touch the combination for the money in my opinion.

I didn't think the G3X was certified either. Don't you still need a certified GPS receiver, like a 430?

 

[moonshine]

You do need certified receiver for IFR - 430W would be the minimum, I'd splurge for the 650 - 430W doesn't have the V-airways capability like the later units do, last I checked (where you give it the entry point, V-number and exit point and the whole thing with the intermediate points is added to the flight plan. Use it every time I go to South Florida, never otherwise)

EFIS etc - go experimental. At this time, I'd go with Advanced (which has been purchased by the Dynon). I've built planes with both the Dynon Skyview (good "enhanced VFR" panel) and G3X (IFR panel) and helped set up and flight-tune a couple of Advanced panels - Advanced is very nice.

 

[airguy]

EFIS etc - go experimental. At this time, I'd go with Advanced (which has been purchased by the Dynon). I've built planes with both the Dynon Skyview (good "enhanced VFR" panel) and G3X (IFR panel) and helped set up and flight-tune a couple of Advanced panels - Advanced is very nice.

Dynon has a VERY good IFR panel now with the advanced autopilot and version 7.0 software out. The field has changed significantly over the last 12 months and likely will continue to, as the different players in the market keep trying to one-up each other.

 

[moonshine]

Which players?
There's Garmin with G3X
Dynon with Skyview
Advanced - bought by Dynon
GRT.. Seems solid, was never in love with one though
MGL? Never flew behind one.
Nothing wrong with Skyview, but if I was building something right now, I'd play close attention to the Advanced

 

[drmax]

Anyone running the gx3 touch with at gtn 650? I've been on the fence for the an upgrade for my 9A about 8 months now. This is the plan. Also using my existing T/T autopilot (which is compat. with 650) and moving most all my steam gages over to the right for redundancy.

 

[Witmo]

By certified I believe the correct term is "meets the appropriate TSO" for the type operation. GPS used for IFR need to comply with the appropriate TSO whether for enroute or terminal use. Transponders also have to be TSOd. Most other avionics do not if used under Part 91. Many avionics shops refuse to install anything that doesn't meet a TSO because they mistakenly assume a standard category aircraft requires TSOd equipment in every instance.

 

[CTLSi]

Anyone running the gx3 touch with at gtn 650? I've been on the fence for the an upgrade for my 9A about 8 months now. This is the plan. Also using my existing T/T autopilot (which is compat. with 650) and moving most all my steam gages over to the right for redundancy.

Flight Design is building the upcoming C4 with the Garmin G3x and Garmin GTN 750 and GNC 255 navcom. The entire aircraft is certified under the new rules for Part 23 rewrite. They will be using the Continental IO-360AF.

 

[tsts4]

Flight Design is building the upcoming C4 with the Garmin G3x and Garmin GTN 750 and GNC 255 navcom. The entire aircraft is certified under the new rules for Part 23 rewrite. They will be using the Continental IO-360AF.

A lot of LSA's already use non-TSO'd avionics (Dynon Skyview, Garmin G3X, etc) because they were certified under ASTM rules rather than part 23.

 

[CTLSi]

A lot of LSA's already use non-TSO'd avionics (Dynon Skyview, Garmin G3X, etc) because they were certified under ASTM rules rather than part 23.

The Flight Design C4 is a certified four-seater which will have part steam gauges and part certified glass like the GTN 750 and part non certified G3X (the mix is allowed under the part 23 rewrite). This aircraft will be full IFR ready.

The Flight Design CTLS are non certified, LSA with Dynon Skyview, Garmin 796 etc.

 

[drmax]

Flight Design is building the upcoming C4 with the Garmin G3x and Garmin GTN 750 and GNC 255 navcom. The entire aircraft is certified under the new rules for Part 23 rewrite. They will be using the Continental IO-360AF.

Not affording 750. Dunno wut part 23 is. Will read. So I guess.nobody has the setup I asked earlier. When I get it I'll let u know. Then ask away!

 

[Henning]

Another consideration - as it sounds like you haven't started building yet - is that the state of the art is advancing so rapidly, you might want to wait awhile before locking yourself into anything.

I know at least one builder with new-in-box Blue Mountain gear collecting dust. And they're STILL not at the point of needing it for installation.

Amen, in the experimental world avionics develop too quickly. Unless you are within a couple months of flying, I wouldn't be making any purchases.

 

[Todd Copeland]

Amen, in the experimental world avionics develop too quickly. Unless you are within a couple months of flying, I wouldn't be making any purchases.

That's absolutely true. I waited until the last minute to buy my garmin g3x for this reason. It's wired and installed but as I finished that, garmin announced the g3x touch. It has a much bigger screen that I would prefer. That is frustrating to say the least. The way i figure it, the glass panels will make sense to upgrade to newer technology at least every ten years. I will make changes during my ownership based on need, desire, and how much trouble it is to make the change. At least with experimental government regulation only plays a small part in that decision matrix.

 

[Henning]

I'm hoping when Experimental-Non Commercial comes out, it will be a bit more expansive than initial proposals, hopefully anything below 6000lbs MGW. My bet is that this subject is the major impetus behind that. Without that, NEXGEN will be impossible to implement in the US, and that is still the plan. It will also help cope with ADS-B cost burden everyone is grousing about, the FAA do have to act in a cost conscious manner. It is not the primary criteria, but it is one that they must figure.

 

[drmax]

Amen, in the experimental world avionics develop too quickly. Unless you are within a couple months of flying, I wouldn't be making any purchases.

failing kln89b. About to dart my ifr training. Just gonna upgrade now and get it over with. Rv9a

 

[Henning]

failing kln89b. About to dart my ifr training. Just gonna upgrade now and get it over with. Rv9a

GTN-750 if you're gonna use it now, maybe a 650, and one of the EFIS panels, probably the G-3xTS.

 

[Bill Watson]

I'm not sure it is as true now as it was then (2008-9) but the choice between Garmin and other brands was price. An all Garmin panel is a good thing but was twice the price of non-Garmin. May have changed.

 

[tsts4]

I'm not sure it is as true now as it was then (2008-9) but the choice between Garmin and other brands was price. An all Garmin panel is a good thing but was twice the price of non-Garmin. May have changed.

Garmin is still the high end of the market, but the prices have come down considerably. You can get a G3X 3-screen dual AHRS system for a lot less than what I paid for a 2-screen single AHRS system a couple of years ago.

For me it was less about price and more about than the brand. I have G1000 experience and liked the interface between the G3X, 650 & SL 30, and the TruTrak AP. So I was willing to pay a price premimum. YMMV.....

 

[yakdriver]

I would go with the Dynon Skyview over Garmin any day. It is well proven and Dynon keeps adding more and more features to the software. They have the best customer service and helpful and knowledgeable techs. All of their software upgrades are free. The dealings I and others have had with Garmin have been not so pleasant. Don

 

[CTLSi]

I would go with the Dynon Skyview over Garmin any day. It is well proven and Dynon keeps adding more and more features to the software. They have the best customer service and helpful and knowledgeable techs. All of their software upgrades are free. The dealings I and others have had with Garmin have been not so pleasant. Don

I have Dynon Skyviews, Dynon Autopilot, Dynon ADS-B and a Garmin 796 in my cockpit right now. So I have experience with both in use and updating.

It is true the Dynon updates are free. The Garmin requires subscription for everything from sectionals, to safe taxi, to terrain updates. But the Garmin is more sophisticated than the Dynon is for flight planning and waypoint look-up.

My next aircraft will have an all Garmin cockpit, the G3x, GTN 750. I know I am gonna get stung on the updates, but also know the gear is gonna be Garmin slick and that's not a bad thing.

 

[tsts4]

The dealings I and others have had with Garmin have been not so pleasant. Don

Then you have not dealt with the experimental product folks. Those guys are great and are active on VAF and readily assist with issues as a couple of the team are RV builders plus other makes.

 

[Henning]

I have Dynon Skyviews, Dynon Autopilot, Dynon ADS-B and a Garmin 796 in my cockpit right now. So I have experience with both in use and updating.

It is true the Dynon updates are free. The Garmin requires subscription for everything from sectionals, to safe taxi, to terrain updates. But the Garmin is more sophisticated than the Dynon is for flight planning and waypoint look-up.

My next aircraft will have an all Garmin cockpit, the G3x, GTN 750. I know I am gonna get stung on the updates, but also know the gear is gonna be Garmin slick and that's not a bad thing.

The 3xTS and 750 would make an awesome combo, it would be really good for having a redundant two sided panel to have two setups.

 

[CTLSi]

The 3xTS and 750 would make an awesome combo, it would be really good for having a redundant two sided panel to have two setups.

There will be two G3x, yes. A sixpack of steam gauges top of middle, and the GTN 750 below that with its radio stack. It will be a certified four-seater despite the G3x being non certified under the Part 23 rewrite.

I plan to get my instrument ticket in that aircraft. The Flight Design C4.