Which would you do first? WX or Approach GPS

[dogman]

I have been flying the Six and have got to know it pretty well, working on my IR. Heres my problem It has the Appollo GX55 enroute Cert. GPS works great. BUT NO ADF on board. So all I have for approaches is VOR ILS LOC. Equiped with Dual NAV/COMS/both have GS's - Appollo GX55 IFR enRT CERT. all coupled to the HSI and Century 2000 Auto Pilot.

I would like to add a 430 but would also really want the 396 for WX.

Which should I do first?? Can't buy both at the same time. Get one now and the other in a few months.

Dogman

 

[Bill]

Which should I do first?? Can't buy both at the same time. Get one now and the other in a few months.

For IR training purposes, if you have a CFII who is savy in the 430, I'd buy the 430 first, and learn to shoot approaches with your II. Then, later, once you have your IR, go for the 396.

JMHO

 

[EdFred]

430 No question.
122.0 gets me weather.

 

[Ken Ibold]

I have been flying the Six and have got to know it pretty well, working on my IR. Heres my problem It has the Appollo GX55 enroute Cert. GPS works great. BUT NO ADF on board. So all I have for approaches is VOR ILS LOC. Equiped with Dual NAV/COMS/both have GS's - Appollo GX55 IFR enRT CERT. all coupled to the HSI and Century 2000 Auto Pilot.

Given those two options, I personally would opt for the 430. However, I am not you and I would explore other options as well, including a 530 or a less-expensive approach-approved GPS paired with an MFD. Maybe you have already done that and have come down to this choice.

But in order to really answer this question, a little more soul-searching. Riddle me this, Batman:

Where do you fly? How much of a hindrance is not having the GPS approaches or not having the ADF? Do would want the approach certification for those approaches that use an NDB on the miss or are there airports you'd like to visit that only have NDB & GPS approaches?

What kind of weather do you fly in? How big a deal is it to scrub/delay/reroute your flight? Do you want the 396 weather for T-storms? icing? winds? to replace your DUAT work preflight?

What's your next upgrade path? Do you eventually want electronic charts? stormscope displayed on a map? WAAS approaches?

 

[Henning]

I have been flying the Six and have got to know it pretty well, working on my IR. Heres my problem It has the Appollo GX55 enroute Cert. GPS works great. BUT NO ADF on board. So all I have for approaches is VOR ILS LOC. Equiped with Dual NAV/COMS/both have GS's - Appollo GX55 IFR enRT CERT. all coupled to the HSI and Century 2000 Auto Pilot.

I would like to add a 430 but would also really want the 396 for WX.

Which should I do first?? Can't buy both at the same time. Get one now and the other in a few months.

Dogman

Kinda a no brainer on the "bang for your buck" scale, an approach certified GPS is called for, though I'd look a lot closer at the MX-20 with a GNC 300XL TSO GPS/Comm. Lot's of features and immensly better charting. I'd put it low center in the panel below the AI (or EFIS?). Then if you really want the weather, just add a radar and get the real weather real time right out front. Even if left with no Radar, it's an impressive set up.

 

[bstratt]

If you go for the GPS with the idea of adding weather later, you should probably go for the 530 rather than the 430, or the MFD if you can afford it. The screen on the 430 is small if you start adding weather.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Kinda a no brainer on the "bang for your buck" scale, an approach certified GPS is called for, though I'd look a lot closer at the MX-20 with a GNC 300XL TSO GPS/Comm. Lot's of features and immensly better charting. I'd put it low center in the panel below the AI (or EFIS?). Then if you really want the weather, just add a radar and get the real weather real time right out front. Even if left with no Radar, it's an impressive set up.

You're not going to get a radar setup that's worth a darn on a Cherokee Six.

 

[AirBaker]

I have been flying the Six and have got to know it pretty well, working on my IR. Heres my problem It has the Appollo GX55 enroute Cert. GPS works great. BUT NO ADF on board. So all I have for approaches is VOR ILS LOC. Equiped with Dual NAV/COMS/both have GS's - Appollo GX55 IFR enRT CERT. all coupled to the HSI and Century 2000 Auto Pilot.

I would like to add a 430 but would also really want the 396 for WX.

Which should I do first?? Can't buy both at the same time. Get one now and the other in a few months.

Dogman

If you dont have an approach certified GPS, get one. There are plenty of options to get you a moving map if that's important. (Upgrade to a 430, get a 296/396, MFD etc).

 

[Henning]

You're not going to get a radar setup that's worth a darn on a Cherokee Six.

I used to fly a 210 that had an underwing radar pod that worked nicely, I was assuming you can get the same for the 6.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Generally agree with all that's been said in favor of the 430 first.

Where the 396 is really useful, is on long flights where things can really change while one is enroute: for instance, Dallas to Madison tomorrow. In the four or five hours spent enroute, things can change dramatically.

If your'e flying shorter trips or staying local, if weather is a real issue, don't go. Flight Watch/service would be the next best source and can be great. Problem is they can get real busy when the weather is bad, and, you have to keep calling them for updates if conditions are rapidly changing.

Still, the IFR certified box comes first; then the ability to deal with weather better.

Dave

 

[AirBaker]

Still, the IFR certified box comes first; then the ability to deal with weather better.

Dave

Especially if you've got something like a P-Baron that's a little more durable in worse weather...

 

[ScottM]

Does the 480 do WX? If so I would opt for that over the 430.

I have a storm scope and I keep agonizing on getting the 396 to add WX into the cockpit. But everytime I add up the cost I think would I really use it? I mean if it is that close I would stay on the ground. I already hardly use the storm scope becasue I try and avoid flight conditions where I would need it.

 

[Bones]

For me it would depend on the aircraft I was flying, the type of flights I was doing, and the altitudes I was flying at.

I think if it wasn't a turbine I would go with the 430...in my opinion you will get more use outta it and it will influence your safety of flight more often than WX radar or uploadalbe radar.

-=EVD=-

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Especially if you've got something like a P-Baron that's a little more durable in worse weather...

Yes, if you saw me in person you would notice I can't keep a straight face when talking about the P-Baron. I simply love this plane.

I do a lot of long distance, cross country flights; over mountains; water, at night. Still, there are limits. Scrubbed a mission to Ada, OK Wednesday to have Gami look things over. Freezing rain with ice pellets. Could have gotten up there O.K., but coming back would have put me in the middle of the crud that came in here yesterday. Dallas just isn't geared up for ice. You also look at things a little differently when it's your plane and there aren't too many marks or dents on it

I have a 396; two IFR GPSs; storm scope, and radar on this plane. I use the GPSs the most. 396 weather next. As I get closer into a weather system, the storm scope and radar become very useful----But, most of all, I try to stay out of systems that push the limits. The 396 (or staying on the ground) is great for avoiding the worst stuff!!

Best,

Dave

 

[AirBaker]

Does the 480 do WX? If so I would opt for that over the 430.

I have a storm scope and I keep agonizing on getting the 396 to add WX into the cockpit. But everytime I add up the cost I think would I really use it? I mean if it is that close I would stay on the ground. I already hardly use the storm scope becasue I try and avoid flight conditions where I would need it.

I feel basically the same way. I'm not enough of a hardcore IFR guy yet.

I haven't seen anything that says the 480 does WX. Didn't see anything obvious from their website either. I'd rather have the 480 over the 430 anyways. It is a little less user friendly than the 430, but it appears to have a much faster processor.

 

[dogman]

Thank you for the advise.

I do have the storm scope.

I do quite a bit of cross country in the six, I live in the Kansas city area and the last few months I have been to Shreveport, Denver ,Minneapolis Austin and many others. Have set on the ground a bit for weather. I go into many non controlled fields. but there is usually an ILS, vor or LOC not far.

I will begin search for a good deal on a 430 or 530.

Jon Hann (Dogman)

 

[Carol]

430 No question.
122.0 gets me weather.

Ditto.

 

[Iceman]

I would go with the 430 first. However, the cost difference between the two is considerable.

IMO this is a good time of the year to get a new radio put in. You might want to print out this link and ask them what they will install the radio for labor only. If you want to buy one used see if they have the serial number in the system for the WAAS upgrade (due by the 15 of nov).

If you are interested in getting weather there are some pda systems that are being sold used for around 7-800 that can display that information.

 

[Kelly]

I had been planning to put in a 430 and a stormscope this spring. When the 396 came out (and I know everyone thinks it's expensive, but compared to a stormscope installation and all it offers it is amazing), I changed moved up my plans and got a 530 and a 396. I finally have a panel that I love.

 

[gibbons]

Well, I've always been a bit of a contrarian.

Given where I live (lots of bad weather and plenty of precision approaches) I'd opt for something with XM weather first. Although the NexRad weather is considered strategic, on the MX20 it's almost as good as onboard weather radar. Add to that the winds aloft, cloud tops, text METARS, forecasts, etc. and you have a pretty impressive suite of weather tools.

Remember that a weather subscription is probably more expensive than database updates for your GPS (you are going to keep the database current, right?), and that if you are based at an airport where GPS or GPS overlay approaches are the norm then the GPS is probably a better option. The interesting thing is, about nine out of ten people I've asked who have approach certified GPS's don't keep the database updated often enough to be legal anyway.

YMMV.

 

[Iceman]

The interesting thing is, about nine out of ten people I've asked who have approach certified GPS's don't keep the database updated often enough to be legal anyway.

I really don't understand this. People will spend thousands to put a new gps in and not keep it updated to stay legal???

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I really don't understand this. People will spend thousands to put a new gps in and not keep it updated to stay legal???

Yep. I saw an FBO advertising a rental plane with an "IFR Certified GPS! Fly Direct!" but the database was several YEARS old. And I know people fly it IFR, direct, and don't care.

I tend to think that those on this board are the type who take aviation, and learning about aviation, very seriously. We are not the problem - It's those folks that aren't here (or other boards, or learning in other ways) that worry me.