I think I'm ready to pull the trigger on an avionics upgrade for my PA-28-180 Archer instead of just adding a NavWorx box as I posted a while back. Most of my flying will be VFR, but I would like more flexibility for IFR to make cross country trips outside of the desert southwest; particularly to SOCAL, Pac Northwest, Gulf Coast, and Midwest. Many places I want to fly to will require ADS-B compliance beginning in 2020, so I think I would just like to "bite the bullet" now. I have had my airplane for eleven years and really have no desire for anything more complicated than a simple Cherokee.
Current Equipment
Audio Panel - KMA 24 (keep)
Intercom - Sigtronics four place intercom (keep)
Com 1 - KY 97A (keep)
Com 2 - TKM MX-11 (remove - weak radio)
Nav 1 - KN 53 (keep) CDI/GS - KI209 (keep)
Nav 2 - Narco Nav 11 (remove - inop)
DME - KN 64 (prob keep ?)
ADF - KR 87 (remove - inop)
Transponder - Narco AT 150 (keep)
GPS - GPS 196 (keep) - this GPS is not panel mounted in a dock, fits on yoke.
New Equipment
Com/Nav/GPS - GTN 650 w/ GI106A
ADS-B out - GDL 88
ADB-B in - Flightstream 210 synced to iPad mini with iPhone as backup
I plan to go paperless using an iPad mini using Garmin Pilot which will sync with GTN 650 through the Flightstream 210 for ADS-B in goodies with the added benefit of backup attitude information in the event of vacuum failure. Garmin GPS 196 w/batteries as third layer of backup.
My thought is that a GTN 750 is overkill and that lower price of the 650 would more than offset the cost of using an iPad as a MFD and the Flightstream 210 as the ADS-B in device. The retail price of the Flightstream 210 is $100 more than the Stratus II.
I do have a ballpark idea of what this will cost.
Comments are most welcome!
Could you please elaborate why?
In my business life I have been burned by not sticking with the major player. I tried to save money by going with a lessor known company but ultimately cost me dearly. It was a hard lesson; one that I will never forget. Even with my handheld GPS, folks were poo pooing Garmin over Lowrance back in 2004. Guess who is still around providing updates to their product?
Thanks for the input.
The GDN-88 may require that you also replace your transponder---check on this.
I use Garmin Pilot, so I will probably go with the GDN-84 instead, which I think should work with my current transponder (I am still checking on this).
I thought about keeping the DME just for redundancy. I noticed in another thread that Cap'n Ron removed his and didn't regret the decision, so that does get my attention.
Walboy,
Don't fly in anyone's airplane that has a GTN750 if you decide to install a GTN650 as it will make you mad you did not do the same.
Install the GTN750 and you won't regret it, even though your wallet will be lighter.
I question the GDL88 and flight stream. Isn't there a box that will do both in and out and Wifi? I use Wing X so it looks like the Navworks can do that with a GTN650. Don't know about the navworx displaying traffic on the GTN...
Would you say that the display on the 750 is adequate for ADS-B in goodies and skip the Flightstream 210?
One concern of mine is information overload. My thought is an iPad as a MFD gives more bang for the buck, especially with the AHRS attitude information being sent to iPad.
Thanks for the input. There is a lot to consider.
If installing the 750, would you skip the Flightstream? Would you keep or remove the DME?
I have to say that my hangar neighbor's iPad shutdown twice during August and September here in AZ...and that was a bit troublesome for me. But I do think the cabin airflow in my airplane is better and his iPad was taking a direct hit from sunlight. I think my yoke has better shade than his yoke in a C-182. Never once did his 530W shutdown in the heat.
Your point is well taken...thanks!
Thanks for the input.
I really don't have enough real world IFR experience to know if keeping the DME is worthwhile or not, so your opinion will be an important factor. With respect to the transponder, all I can say is it still works.
I am wary about going paperless. I'm hoping the iPad/iPhone combo provides adequate redundancy.
This is a BIG step for me, one I have been putting off for years.
I'd never heard of the PAR200 before. That thing rocks!
I think I'm ready to pull the trigger on an avionics upgrade for my PA-28-180 Archer instead of just adding a NavWorx box as I posted a while back. Most of my flying will be VFR, but I would like more flexibility for IFR to make cross country trips outside of the desert southwest; particularly to SOCAL, Pac Northwest, Gulf Coast, and Midwest. Many places I want to fly to will require ADS-B compliance beginning in 2020, so I think I would just like to "bite the bullet" now. I have had my airplane for eleven years and really have no desire for anything more complicated than a simple Cherokee.
Current Equipment
Audio Panel - KMA 24 (keep)
Intercom - Sigtronics four place intercom (keep)
Com 1 - KY 97A (keep)
Com 2 - TKM MX-11 (remove - weak radio)
Nav 1 - KN 53 (keep) CDI/GS - KI209 (keep)
Nav 2 - Narco Nav 11 (remove - inop)
DME - KN 64 (prob keep ?)
ADF - KR 87 (remove - inop)
Transponder - Narco AT 150 (keep)
GPS - GPS 196 (keep) - this GPS is not panel mounted in a dock, fits on yoke.
New Equipment
Com/Nav/GPS - GTN 650 w/ GI106A
ADS-B out - GDL 88
ADB-B in - Flightstream 210 synced to iPad mini with iPhone as backup
I plan to go paperless using an iPad mini using Garmin Pilot which will sync with GTN 650 through the Flightstream 210 for ADS-B in goodies with the added benefit of backup attitude information in the event of vacuum failure. Garmin GPS 196 w/batteries as third layer of backup.
My thought is that a GTN 750 is overkill and that lower price of the 650 would more than offset the cost of using an iPad as a MFD and the Flightstream 210 as the ADS-B in device. The retail price of the Flightstream 210 is $100 more than the Stratus II.
I do have a ballpark idea of what this will cost.
Comments are most welcome!
Would you say that the display on the 750 is adequate for ADS-B in goodies and skip the Flightstream 210?
One concern of mine is information overload. My thought is an iPad as a MFD gives more bang for the buck, especially with the AHRS attitude information being sent to iPad.
Thanks for the input. There is a lot to consider.
KLN-94 and an Aspen and ignore the ADS-B stuff for right now...the stuff will get cheaper? I believe that gives you far more capability than just the GTN650 other than the no wass,
With out WAAS that's less capability.
Doing a panel upgrade without WAAS makes zero sense.
The first thing Id do is make sure I have a good foundation, you'll need WAAS for the ADSB to work later on.
I'm holding off right now on ADSB too, I already have traffic on my 530/430, and just need to mod my GTX330 to a ES and have a few wires added, too bad garmin is the only one who can do it.
It depends on your goals, do you want the upgrade for aviation reasons, or for looks reasons.
With out WAAS that's less capability.
Doing a panel upgrade without WAAS makes zero sense.
The first thing Id do is make sure I have a good foundation, you'll need WAAS for the ADSB to work later on.
I'm holding off right now on ADSB too, I already have traffic on my 530/430, and just need to mod my GTX330 to a ES and have a few wires added, too bad garmin is the only one who can do it.
It depends on your goals, do you want the upgrade for aviation reasons, or for looks reasons.
I was really set on the PMA8000BT but I have not seen a TSO-169a (and stuck mic TSO-C128a) com radio for the difference in price between the 8000BT and PAR200.
For example, the stand alone Garmin GTR225 (TSO169a & C128a) com is $1795.
Hi Brian, I read your post and I am sorry but I don't understand it. Can you please help me to understand your point? Maybe I can clarify how our panels work.
Thanks Brian!
Mark Scheuer
PS Engineering, Inc
Don't forget this:The avionics shop is strongly recommending that I reconsider ditching the DME.... Keep it or ditch it?
Normally I would recommend keeping the DME if it was working, but with the KN64, the mutual suppression Bus between the GDL88 and the KN64 are not compatible. This may permit the DME to interfere with the GDL88, so I would sell the KN64.
Don't forget this:
Remember a DME is an active high power transmitter. Normally there a suppression circuit between the transponder and the DME to prevent the two from interfering with each other. The DME will interfere with the GDL88 in the same manner without suppression.
The avionics shop is strongly recommending that I reconsider ditching the DME. I have several weeks to think about this. I need to make sure I understand alternate rules with a WAAS GPS. If my destination airport has a GPS approach, then it is my understanding that the alternate must have ground based Navaids, which in many cases requires DME. Can the GPS still substitute for DME at the alternate airport even though I would be using VOR or ILS?
I know Ron Levy has mentioned he removed his DME and has never once regretted it, which factored heavily into my original decision to remove it. It is highly unlikely that I will be flying very many approaches anyway.
Keep it or ditch it?
Thanks John.
I'm looking at the 2015 AIM, 1-1-18 g.1 which may be the source of my confusion. I "think" that applies to GPS which I'm finding out means something entirely different than WAAS as far as the AIM goes.
Edit: I think I found the rule in the AIM 1-1-19 c. 7. (a)
Could you kindly tell me where I can find the rules you cited? I don't doubt you, but I would like to note it in my FARS/AIM for future reference.
When I got my instrument rating, I didn't learn anything about GPS/RNAV since my airplane wasn't equipped with it. Now I need to get up to speed.
9. Unlike TSO−C129 avionics, which were certified as a supplement to other means of navigation, WAAS avionics are evaluated without reliance on other navigation systems. As such, installation of WAAS avionics does not require the aircraft to have other equipment appropriate to the route to be flown. (See paragraph 1−1−18d for more information on equipment requirements.)
(a) Pilots with WAAS receivers may flight plan to use any instrument approach procedure authorized for use with their WAAS avionics as the planned approach at a required alternate, with the following restrictions. When using WAAS at an alternate airport, flight planning must be based on flying the RNAV (GPS) LNAV or circling minima line, or minima on a GPS approach procedure, or conventional approach procedure with “or GPS” in the title. Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Part 91 non−precision weather requirements must be used for planning. Upon arrival at an alternate, when the WAAS navigation system indicates that LNAV/VNAV or LPV service is available, then vertical guidance may be used to complete the approach using the displayed level of service.
d. Alternate Airport Considerations.
For the purposes of flight planning, any required alternate airport must have an available instrument approach procedure that does not require the use of GPS. This restriction includes conducting a conventional approach at the alternate airport using a substitute means of navigation that is based upon the use of GPS. For example, these restrictions would apply when planning to use GPS equipment as a substitute means of navigation for an out−of−service VOR that supports an ILS missed approach procedure at an alternate airport. In this case, some other approach not reliant upon the use of GPS must be available. This restriction does not apply to RNAV systems using TSO−C145/−C146 WAAS equipment. For further WAAS guidance, see paragraph 1−1−19.
1. For flight planning purposes, TSO-C129() and TSO-C196() equipped users (GPS users) whose navigation systems have fault detection and exclusion (FDE) capability, who perform a preflight RAIM prediction at the airport where the RNAV (GPS) approach will be flown, and have proper knowledge and any required training and/or approval to conduct a GPS-based IAP, may file based on a GPS-based IAP at either the destination or the alternate airport, but not at both locations. At the alternate airport, pilots may plan for applicable alternate airport weather minimums using:
(a) Lateral navigation (LNAV) or circling minimum descent altitude (MDA);
(b) LNAV/vertical navigation (LNAV/VNAV) DA, if equipped with and using approved barometric vertical navigation (baro-VNAV) equipment;
(c) RNP 0.3 DA on an RNAV (RNP) IAP, if they are specifically authorized users using approved baro-VNAV equipment and the pilot has verified required navigation performance (RNP) availability through an approved prediction program.
2. If the above conditions cannot be met, any required alternate airport must have an approved instrument approach procedure other than GPS that is anticipated to be operational and available at the estimated time of arrival, and which the aircraft is equipped to fly.
3. This restriction does not apply to TSO-C145() and TSO-C146() equipped users (WAAS users). For further WAAS guidance, see paragraph 1−1−19.
Thanks for mentioning this reference. It never occurred to me to check ACs.