IFR Training Equip

PilotRPI

PilotRPI

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
618
Location
MA - 1B9
Display Name
Display name:
PilotRPI
My 172 has one radio with just a VOR and another radio with a VOR/ILS. Is that enough to get through training and the check ride?

Someone said they thought I need to be able to do three different types of approaches. I do not have a dme or ndb. Keep in mind I know next to nothing about IFR training requirements at the moment. Just thinking about going for IFR.

Thanks
 
Yup, got to do 1 precision and 2 non precision.

You should be able to do a

ILS (precision)
VOR (non precision #1)
LOC (non precision #2)

With that radio stack
 
Yea you should be good...
1 ILS, 1 loc, 1 VOR should cover you
 
Excellent. Thank you very much. Now time to start reading the exciting FAA book!
 
As others have already told you, what you have is good enough to fly IFR, at least in theory. Before assuming you're good, I'd suggest looking at the approaches you have available at airports within a reasonable flying distance of you. You might find that some approaches require ADF or DME to be able to fly them, or that there aren't enough approaches you can do nearby with the equipment you have.
 
I did mine with the same type of radio stack, plus whisky compas and a iffy AI (that last part was a headache)

You'll be fine with your panel, actually it would be my ideal setup for a new IFR student, you'd do well to also spend time in the sim and find a CFII that has a good deal of IFR/IMC experience outside of instructing.

Good luck on your training!
 
Thanks everyone. I'm right outside Boston, and I think Hanscomb, Norwood, North Central, and Providence provide the three different types I need. I plan on building a much more capable IFR machine, so this should suit me well for the next few years in terms of building a strong foundation before I move into something much faster.

While slow, my panel is setup really nice and it flies really stable, so it should be good for training. It has a nice standard setup instead of an old shotgun panel.
 
DME would be the last thing I'd add to a plane now (anybody want my KN64?).
 
flyingron said:
DME would be the last thing I'd add to a plane now (anybody want my KN64?).
Click to expand...

Yup. Better to add an old IFR en-route certified GPS to use for DME required approaches. I know where there's a GX-65 with indicator gathering dust :)
 
PilotRPI said:
Thanks everyone. I'm right outside Boston, and I think Hanscomb, Norwood, North Central, and Providence provide the three different types I need. I plan on building a much more capable IFR machine, so this should suit me well for the next few years in terms of building a strong foundation before I move into something much faster.

While slow, my panel is setup really nice and it flies really stable, so it should be good for training. It has a nice standard setup instead of an old shotgun panel.
Click to expand...

I fly out of BVY and is awesome for this types of training....

LWM, BVY, and BED make up a good training triangle- all class D and are about 10 miles away from each other and all have different approaches. It takes me about 0.7 on the hobbs to do an approach at all 3.

I did all my training with a similar set up. Although I have a 430W in the plane I fly now I didn't lose anything by training with just 2 good radios. Easy around here as there are a ton of good approaches within a short distance
 
rolivi said:
Yup. Better to add an old IFR en-route certified GPS to use for DME required approaches. I know where there's a GX-65 with indicator gathering dust :)
Click to expand...
Oh God, you would subject an instrument student to that flaming POS?

And advantage to DME is that it is dirt simple to use. Apollo GPSs have worse interfaces than Garmin.
 
While I appreciate being called God, I fear it is undeserved.

I've never noticed any flames coming from the GX65, and it would seem that the interface is understandable, even to the dolts who buy them.

Thank you so much for sharing your valuable insights.
 
MAKG1 said:
And advantage to DME is that it is dirt simple to use. Apollo GPSs have worse interfaces than Garmin.
Click to expand...
You're kidding, right. Almost every Apollo unit from the handheld 920 on through all of the their panel mounts have had SUPERIOR interfaces to the Garmins of the same era.
 
flyingron said:
You're kidding, right. Almost every Apollo unit from the handheld 920 on through all of the their panel mounts have had SUPERIOR interfaces to the Garmins of the same era.
Click to expand...
Nope. I'm proficient in GX50 and GX60 series, as those were once standard issue for CAP and quite a few are still around.

The interface is similar to a Garmin 400 series, with a few major differences. The big one is that the menus are circular, so a new user can get very easily lost in them.

Same era is irrelevant. You are talking about exposing a student now, not in 2005.
 
Amazing how every thread on this site becomes an argument. Relax dudes. Take it easy. All I wanted was some info on my plane, as I was excited at the prospect of starting IFR training, and people manage to even mess that up. Most pilots I meet are pretty cool, yet a lot on here seem to have a real short fuse.

Thanks to those that gave me factual answers, as there wasn't even a matter of opinion involved.
 
The Internet is the Great Debating Society! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top