IFR Check Ride: 172 / Garmin 430 OR 172 G1000?

[VWGhiaBob]

Saw the other great post today about failing an IFR check ride in a twin. So much for all of us to learn from and the post is much appreciated!

After much consideration, I've decided to use the easiest plane I know of to learn IFR, the 172. (I usually fly high performance...Cirrus, Saratoga, 182).

Question is, which is easier to learn and pass the test....a traditional steam 172 with a Garmin 430 / 530 OR a 172 G1000?

I know the standard answer is "train in what you will buy". Trouble is, I don't now what I will buy, so transition training will be needed anyway. I want to focus on IFR, not on airplane complexities.

So back to the question...which of the two 172 options gives the easiest platform for learning and passing the test?

Thanks, members!

 

[ssonixx]

I'd fly it in the G1000 esp if you know that system. It is harder to fail the G1000 completely, just hot swap, and having geo referenced approach plates screaming at you with well marked missed procedures can only help situational awareness.

YMMV, but you also may benefit in that some of the DPEs won't know the glass systems that well in your plane so won't be able to get too far with failing specific pieces of equipment. Not to say that you should game the system per se, but as you said you already mostly fly these systems anyway.

And lastly, as part of the test, you will fly one of the approaches with the AP (if available) so if it can fly fully coupled then it becomes fairly easy.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[warthog1984]

The G1000 will be easier to pass the test in, the steam gauges will be easier to actually fly.

Also, steam-> glass is way easier than glass-> steam.

 

[bqmassey]

That's a tough call, and I do think it depends on the person. I also think it's pertinent to differentiate between 'easy' and 'simple'.

The steam plane is much more simple, but whether or not it's easier will probably have to do with the pilot, and probably how good his spatial situational awareness is. If it's average or better, the simplicity of the aircraft could offer an advantage in how long it takes you to become proficient with everything in the cockpit.

The G1000 might be easier for you, but it's also much more complex. There's more to learn to really understand and make use of all of the features and processes. If you're more accustomed to steam gauges, or you're not someone with a knack for electronics, the G1000 may not come as quickly as the steam gauges.

If I had to offer a generic suggestion, I'd recommend flying the steam gauge plane for your basic attitude flying skills (so you don't build a dependence on the assistance the G1000 provides) and then once you start getting into approaches—where you have to become intimately familiar with your nav equipment—fly them both a little bit and continue with the avionics package comes more naturally to you. Just a suggestion, I'm no authority on the subject.

My instrument rating left me with a similar situation. I ended up flying and becoming proficient in both. It's entirely dependent on the person, but I was checkride ready in the steam gauge aircraft before I was in the glass ship.

 

[VWGhiaBob]

Great insights...at least it makes me think it's not a dumb question.

Leaning toward G1000, because:
1. I have access to a great G1000 172, tip top condition, $160 / hr. wet
2. I'm very comfortable with technology (IT guy)
3. Already comfortable with Avidyne, 430, 530, KLN94

 

[N747JB]

I think it's whatever makes YOU the most comfortable. If you like the G1000 and aren't intimidated by the glass, I'd say use it.

Great insights...at least it makes me think it's not a dumb question.

Leaning toward G1000, because:
1. I have access to a great G1000 172, tip top condition, $160 / hr. wet
2. I'm very comfortable with technology (IT guy)
3. Already comfortable with Avidyne, 430, 530, KLN94

 

[write-stuff]

I'd say the G1000 is going to be easier to learn and more intuitive than round dials. It has a lot of extras, but for the basics, the G1000 beats a steam gauge panel any day.

Now the hard part comes in with the use of autopilot or flight control system. You'd likely be in a conventional panel without an autopilot for training. But if you're using a G1000, you'll probably have an autopilot and possibly a flight director. Learning approaches using the autopilot becomes just about as challenging as learning to hand fly approaches. The Garmin GFC 700 flight control system (in most newer G1000 singles) is an absolutely fantastic piece of equipment. But there is a significant learning curve involved.

 

[mjburian]

Great insights...at least it makes me think it's not a dumb question.

Leaning toward G1000, because:
1. I have access to a great G1000 172, tip top condition, $160 / hr. wet
2. I'm very comfortable with technology (IT guy)
3. Already comfortable with Avidyne, 430, 530, KLN94

Seems to me that #3 answers the question. You're already comfortable with the 430 and, presumably, steam gauge flying. So why add learning the G1000 to the mix? If you had to learn something new either way (ie, no 430 experience), then I'd say it's a toss up. But since you already know the 430 (and assuming you're comfortable flying steam gauges) then I'd think the easiest way to your IR would be flying the systems you already know.

 

[jordane93]

Seems to me that #3 answers the question. You're already comfortable with the 430 and, presumably, steam gauge flying. So why add learning the G1000 to the mix? If you had to learn something new either way (ie, no 430 experience), then I'd say it's a toss up. But since you already know the 430 (and assuming you're comfortable flying steam gauges) then I'd think the easiest way to your IR would be flying the systems you already know.

+1.

 

[GCA319]

I'd suggest learning with steam gauges unless your plan after the checkride is to fly the G1000 only. The transition from steam to glass is a lot easier than vice versa.

 

[Henning]

Saw the other great post today about failing an IFR check ride in a twin. So much for all of us to learn from and the post is much appreciated!

After much consideration, I've decided to use the easiest plane I know of to learn IFR, the 172. (I usually fly high performance...Cirrus, Saratoga, 182).

Question is, which is easier to learn and pass the test....a traditional steam 172 with a Garmin 430 / 530 OR a 172 G1000?

I know the standard answer is "train in what you will buy". Trouble is, I don't now what I will buy, so transition training will be needed anyway. I want to focus on IFR, not on airplane complexities.

So back to the question...which of the two 172 options gives the easiest platform for learning and passing the test?

Thanks, members!

I passed in a 172 with a single Kx-170B w/GS and an ADF. Doesn't get simpler than that.

Question comes down to, "Do you want the rating as easy as possible, or do you want the rating to get you ready to fly IFR in IMC on real trips with confidence and experience in the plane you are traveling in?

If you want the rating easy, get in an old 172 with a pair of Kx-155s and an ADF. Don't fear the ADF, it's the easiest thing to use. The key to ADF approaches is judging the cross wind cut and keeping the needle steady, not necessarily centered. DE didn't even want me to descend just track the approach at 4000'.

When you are done with your IR training and passed that ride, you will be as **** hot in that plane as you will ever be. If you normally travel in a Cirrus, then if you rent a basic 172 to go get your IR in, you aren't going to be comfortable the day after passing your Checkride getting in the SR-22 and flying a trip in IMC.

If you do your 40 hrs and ride in the Cirrus, you will definitely be ready and confident in you knowledge of and ability to use the systems and to handle a variety of emergencies. Put in the learning, the sitting in the plane with a power cart and the manual and really spinning and pushing and learning it. Really learn the equipment and fly it. We did the last 38 out of 40 hours flying cross country all over Southern and Central California, shooting an approach at every airport that had one, during a week in winter with actual to fly in.

The Cross Country method of training, and we were flying 8 hours a day, I think is a really good way to teach it, and there are a lot of airports one right after another in California, you get a workout and a half. Thing was, when it was paper charts and dialing frequencies, it didn't so much matter what equipment you learned on, except for instrument orientation and type.

Now with advanced radios, it's no longer so, each of these radio sets requires a 'type rating' level of knowledge for proper use in IMC. If you do get your certificate in the simple Cessna, you still have several more hours to train on the Cirrus systems. That is unless you already know the Cirrus systems, then there's nothing to gain by switching planes in regards to the IR except cost. That's why I did my IR in the 172 even though I had a Travelair, I got the 172 for $30 hr wet with the instructor.

Again though, it was all simple radios, and I had 2 KX-165s with GS, a DME, and ADF. The 430W is a rating in itself, each of these complex RNAV boxes are. If you are going to go out and use your ticket to fly in IMC, then the old adage of 'train like you fight' holds solid. Train in the equipment you want to be PIC in IMC after you have your ticket.

 

[dans2992]

I'd suggest learning with steam gauges unless your plan after the checkride is to fly the G1000 only. The transition from steam to glass is a lot easier than vice versa.

Agree

 

[coloradobluesky]

The easiest instruments to pass the IFR test are two VOR's, one with a glideslope and steam gauges. Most of the DE's are older guys that learned on steam gauges, they will be more comfortable with that setup. With the VORs you will be able to fly ILS, Localizer, and VOR approaches. That's 3 approaches. All that's required.

 

[GCA319]

The easiest instruments to pass the IFR test are two VOR's, one with a glideslope and steam gauges. Most of the DE's are older guys that learned on steam gauges, they will be more comfortable with that setup. With the VORs you will be able to fly ILS, Localizer, and VOR approaches. That's 3 approaches. All that's required.

I wouldn't go as far as to say they are more comfortable with a /U or /A panel (though they are likely comfortable with it). Many DE's work full time jobs in an airline or corporate setting with relatively advanced nav equipment (though I would argue that the G1000 is more capable than what is currently available for Part 25 birds), so many are pretty up to date with the current times.

Also, I'd argue that while such a set up is simpler, it isn't necessarily easier. Even the most basic moving map displays make maintaining situational awareness a lot easier and make instrument flying a lot safer than it previously was.

 

[poadeleted20]

Question is, which is easier to learn and pass the test....a traditional steam 172 with a Garmin 430 / 530 OR a 172 G1000?

After nearly 2000 hours of instrument training given, I would say that the quickest and easiest path to passing the IR practical test is in the simplest plane possible with the fewest and least complicated systems. Something like a 172 or Piper Warrior with nothing more than two nav/coms (one with a GS -- that's required), audio panel/intercom, and transponder is perfect for that goal. No autopilot, no GPS, no glass panel, no c/s prop, no retractable gear, no ADF, no nothing that isn't required by the PTS and 91.205(d). If you later decide you want to get a G1000 Bonanza or something like that, you can learn all the rest of that stuff during transition training without the pressure of the practical test.

Now don't go overboard -- you can do it with only one nav/comm, but that's going to create other issues you don't want to raise.

 

[jordane93]

After nearly 2000 hours of instrument training given, I would say that the quickest and easiest path to passing the IR practical test is in the simplest plane possible with the fewest and least complicated systems. Something like a 172 or Piper Warrior with nothing more than two nav/coms (one with a GS -- that's required), audio panel/intercom, and transponder is perfect for that goal. No autopilot, no GPS, no glass panel, no c/s prop, no retractable gear, no ADF, no nothing that isn't required by the PTS and 91.205(d). If you later decide you want to get a G1000 Bonanza or something like that, you can learn all the rest of that stuff during transition training without the pressure of the practical test.

Now don't go overboard -- you can do it with only one nav/comm, but that's going to create other issues you don't want to raise.

I agree with this but since the OP already has experience with a 430/530, it would make sense for him to continue the IFR stuff and learn the procedures and button pushing in a plane equipped with a 430/530

 

[poadeleted20]

I agree with this but since the OP already has experience with a 430/530, it would make sense for him to continue the IFR stuff and learn the procedures and button pushing in a plane equipped with a 430/530

My experience as an instrument instructor with people who claim to know the 430/530 before training is that "experience with a 430/530" and the level of proficiency necessary to do an IR practical test with one are two entirely different things, and it can still take another full day of training to get those folks ready. The OP wanted the fastest, easiest route to the IR, and I'll stick with my answer.

 

[mjburian]

My experience as an instrument instructor with people who claim to know the 430/530 before training is that "experience with a 430/530" and the level of proficiency necessary to do an IR practical test with one are two entirely different things, and it can still take another full day of training to get those folks ready. The OP wanted the fastest, easiest route to the IR, and I'll stick with my answer.

The OP also gave two choices: steam gauges with a 430/530 or a G1000 bird. Given the choice between those two, I still maintain that "experience with a 430/530" is better than learning the G1000 from scratch. At least from an "easiest effort" standpoint.

 

[poadeleted20]

The OP also gave two choices: steam gauges with a 430/530 or a G1000 bird. Given the choice between those two, I still maintain that "experience with a 430/530" is better than learning the G1000 from scratch. At least from an "easiest effort" standpoint.

Given that choice, and that background, I agree -- go with the simpler of the two systems, and the one with which you have at least some experience. But I would strongly recommend doing the EFS 430/530 training program I linked above before starting the IR training.

 

[jordane93]

My experience as an instrument instructor with people who claim to know the 430/530 before training is that "experience with a 430/530" and the level of proficiency necessary to do an IR practical test with one are two entirely different things, and it can still take another full day of training to get those folks ready. The OP wanted the fastest, easiest route to the IR, and I'll stick with my answer.

True. VFR 430 ops are a lot different than IFR 430 ops