- Joined
- May 24, 2016
- Messages
- 848
- Display Name
Display name:
4RNB
This is being written in an attempt to share my experience updating avionics in a 50 year old airplane and the required panel upgrade to fit a larger modern primary flight display. My avionics shop started my upgrade and came to realize that the planned PFD would not fit in the allotted space. I think one option is to hack away at structural components and make it fit, another option was to install one of two new products on the market. The first we learned about and the one we ordered came from Bushliner aircraft. The person we dealt with was Kyle Fosso.
I did a lot of chair flying while waiting on avionics. It was interesting to find a few things out about Kyle. In high school he started a complete rebuild of an older Cessna and in the process ended up with his A&P. If you spend time online, finding some of this stuff and reading about it, you likely have seen the stories already. A youtube channel named “Cleared Direct” has some interesting unscripted inspection videos that feature Kyle going over an older Cessna that some guy bought. Not being a mechanic it does not take much to impress me with aviation, but his level of Cessna knowledge seemed deep. This Cessna experience seems to have grown into the whole Bushliner company. I WANT ONE OF THOSE PLANES! Kyle was readily available through email, text, and phone calls during my install.
So, we ordered the Bushliner Next Gen Panel System and waited for delivery, prolonging an already painful upgrade. I then learned about and considered a competing product from Lyle at Six Pack Aero. He offers a Legacy XL panel system that is advertised as being the only STC/PMA approved Cessna panel system. Lyle was readily available via telephone to discuss his product. There are some distinct differences between the two products so what follows is what I have learned and observed.
Six pack Aero offers a less expensive product. I’m unsure of the exact cost of their panel after installation, but on the surface it appears to be thousands, at least compared to the product we obtained from Bushliner. As a percentage of total job cost, I’d figure on at least a few percent more for the Bushliner product assuming all new avionics. If reusing some old panel instrumentation this percentage would grow.
Lyle made a big point about his panel system having better structural integrity due to one fact. In my older plane there was some piece of “framing” that ran from the panel to the firewall where the yoke goes. My understanding of the Six pack aero system is that this material remains with their system and it is removed for the Bushliner NGPS. I asked Kyle about this, forgetting his specific response but felt fine with the engineering of his product.
One thing not discussed with either company was product suitability for different airplanes. At present it seems that the sixpack aero is only for C172s, while the Bushliner panel system is available for many models of older Cessnas (172, 175, 180, 182, 185).
As far as paperwork, it seems that the Sixpack system is a bit easier as it is STC approved. The Bushliner Panel system requires an additional step of getting a DER approval, included with the purchase price. As far as approval goes, this seems to be mainly an issue of semantics. I think I learned that one approval is 8110-2, the other is 8110-3.
Now having discussed a couple potential advantages of the SixPack Aero system, I want to share my observations of the look of the finished product.
I purchased my plane while still a PPL student pilot and quickly dreamed of having some of the best features to fly my chief financial officer around the US. One option considered was a brand new shiny C182. A representative flew one down for us to demo, it was a lot of fun and my CFO recognized the immense benefit of modern gadgets. Sticking with the Click and Clack “cheaper to keep her” mentality, we decided to just upgrade the current plane and save the money. This new C182 was the plane we were comparing to.
When looking online at the Six Pack Aero product, two distinct differences are apparent. When using their product, the PFD is not centered! It is offset to the right. This could perhaps be tolerated with a split screen format where primary instruments are on the left side of the PFD, but aesthetically for me it just was not the way to go.
With the PFD offset to the right, the radio or center stack avionics are also further moved a bit to the right.
The Bushliner Next Gen Panel System allows for a pleasing and natural (to me) centered PFD and a centered Nav/Com/AP stack. Additionally, the panel system is configured with the specifics of your particular aircraft, not a generic one size fits all approach. To me, this makes the Bushliner system the preferred product. I am sure that anyone that puts in modern avionics would be happy with either system, but the natural centered looks make the plane look newer. Having been through the process I would choose the Bushliner NGPS again.
I do not know of many places that have done this work yet. I expect that for licensed aviation personnel the work is not technically challenging but I was concerned I was the first guinea pig in line. One person that helped me feel better about this was Jonathan Edmonds of Edmonds Aviation in Searcy, Arkansas. Jonathan had installed a Bushliner Panel and shared some info online. He messaged me over many months and was of great help. If you are considering upgrading to one of these new panel systems he is a great resource.
My avionics and other upgrades were performed by Justin Dix of Dix Aviation in South Boston Virginia. This busy growing business was great to work with and stuck closely to their original estimates for work despite the increased complexity of the NGPS. They have learned about these panel upgrades on my plane and are prepared for your plane next.
If you are upgrading an older plane and are considering these products, I hope you find my thoughts here helpful in choosing one of these solutions.
I did a lot of chair flying while waiting on avionics. It was interesting to find a few things out about Kyle. In high school he started a complete rebuild of an older Cessna and in the process ended up with his A&P. If you spend time online, finding some of this stuff and reading about it, you likely have seen the stories already. A youtube channel named “Cleared Direct” has some interesting unscripted inspection videos that feature Kyle going over an older Cessna that some guy bought. Not being a mechanic it does not take much to impress me with aviation, but his level of Cessna knowledge seemed deep. This Cessna experience seems to have grown into the whole Bushliner company. I WANT ONE OF THOSE PLANES! Kyle was readily available through email, text, and phone calls during my install.
So, we ordered the Bushliner Next Gen Panel System and waited for delivery, prolonging an already painful upgrade. I then learned about and considered a competing product from Lyle at Six Pack Aero. He offers a Legacy XL panel system that is advertised as being the only STC/PMA approved Cessna panel system. Lyle was readily available via telephone to discuss his product. There are some distinct differences between the two products so what follows is what I have learned and observed.
Six pack Aero offers a less expensive product. I’m unsure of the exact cost of their panel after installation, but on the surface it appears to be thousands, at least compared to the product we obtained from Bushliner. As a percentage of total job cost, I’d figure on at least a few percent more for the Bushliner product assuming all new avionics. If reusing some old panel instrumentation this percentage would grow.
Lyle made a big point about his panel system having better structural integrity due to one fact. In my older plane there was some piece of “framing” that ran from the panel to the firewall where the yoke goes. My understanding of the Six pack aero system is that this material remains with their system and it is removed for the Bushliner NGPS. I asked Kyle about this, forgetting his specific response but felt fine with the engineering of his product.
One thing not discussed with either company was product suitability for different airplanes. At present it seems that the sixpack aero is only for C172s, while the Bushliner panel system is available for many models of older Cessnas (172, 175, 180, 182, 185).
As far as paperwork, it seems that the Sixpack system is a bit easier as it is STC approved. The Bushliner Panel system requires an additional step of getting a DER approval, included with the purchase price. As far as approval goes, this seems to be mainly an issue of semantics. I think I learned that one approval is 8110-2, the other is 8110-3.
Now having discussed a couple potential advantages of the SixPack Aero system, I want to share my observations of the look of the finished product.
I purchased my plane while still a PPL student pilot and quickly dreamed of having some of the best features to fly my chief financial officer around the US. One option considered was a brand new shiny C182. A representative flew one down for us to demo, it was a lot of fun and my CFO recognized the immense benefit of modern gadgets. Sticking with the Click and Clack “cheaper to keep her” mentality, we decided to just upgrade the current plane and save the money. This new C182 was the plane we were comparing to.
When looking online at the Six Pack Aero product, two distinct differences are apparent. When using their product, the PFD is not centered! It is offset to the right. This could perhaps be tolerated with a split screen format where primary instruments are on the left side of the PFD, but aesthetically for me it just was not the way to go.
With the PFD offset to the right, the radio or center stack avionics are also further moved a bit to the right.
The Bushliner Next Gen Panel System allows for a pleasing and natural (to me) centered PFD and a centered Nav/Com/AP stack. Additionally, the panel system is configured with the specifics of your particular aircraft, not a generic one size fits all approach. To me, this makes the Bushliner system the preferred product. I am sure that anyone that puts in modern avionics would be happy with either system, but the natural centered looks make the plane look newer. Having been through the process I would choose the Bushliner NGPS again.
I do not know of many places that have done this work yet. I expect that for licensed aviation personnel the work is not technically challenging but I was concerned I was the first guinea pig in line. One person that helped me feel better about this was Jonathan Edmonds of Edmonds Aviation in Searcy, Arkansas. Jonathan had installed a Bushliner Panel and shared some info online. He messaged me over many months and was of great help. If you are considering upgrading to one of these new panel systems he is a great resource.
My avionics and other upgrades were performed by Justin Dix of Dix Aviation in South Boston Virginia. This busy growing business was great to work with and stuck closely to their original estimates for work despite the increased complexity of the NGPS. They have learned about these panel upgrades on my plane and are prepared for your plane next.
If you are upgrading an older plane and are considering these products, I hope you find my thoughts here helpful in choosing one of these solutions.
