A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cost to install IFR GPS in a basic IFR 172?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 25th 04, 02:09 PM
Ron Rosenfeld
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 24 Aug 2004 12:15:08 -0700, (C Kingsbury) wrote:

Googling the group yielded little so here goes...

1979 172, overall average condition with mostly original radios and
wiring (one RT-385 recently replaced by a TKM radio, M1 Loran from a
few centuries ago)

The Cessna 300 ADF has gone flaky. The box tests fine on the bench
which suggests a wild goose chase may be in store to find the
gremlins. One of the two ILS approaches at my home field require ADF,
and a few fields I go to are ADF/GPS-only so I need one of the two.

My idea is to find a good used Apollo GX-50/GX-60 unit and replace the
ADF. No need to touch the Loran, it makes a good backup. I'll get
legal ADF and DME capability not to mention a moving map. Trying to
convince 4 other partners this is a good idea b/c it will make it
easier to sell shares in the future and even if they are VFR-only the
moving map is a big plus.

The local flight school says they've been spending an average of $6000
to do this with their birds at the local shop. Those of you who've
done this recently, any thoughts?

Bet,
-cwk.


Whether or not the Apollo units are a good idea or not is not something I
will address. Don't forget that they are essentially "orphaned" units.
Also, to be legal, there may be instances where you need to have the ADF
equipment on board.

However, a recent install of my CNX80 was priced at 45 man-hours for the
installation (@ $60/hr = $2700). In addition to that labor cost, there was
also about $1,000 in extra equipment required not included in the price of
the CNX80.

I believe the unit you are considering will also require remote
annunciators of some sort, which would cost in addition to the labor and
cost of the unit itself.

$6,000 sounds about right. (My CNX80, installed, was about double that).


--ron
  #2  
Old August 25th 04, 05:49 PM
Dude
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Whether or not the Apollo units are a good idea or not is not something I
will address. Don't forget that they are essentially "orphaned" units.
Also, to be legal, there may be instances where you need to have the ADF
equipment on board.


I thought that an IFR GPS was a legal substitute for an ADF in ALL cases????


  #3  
Old August 25th 04, 07:11 PM
Frank Stutzman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dude wrote:
Whether or not the Apollo units are a good idea or not is not something I
will address. Don't forget that they are essentially "orphaned" units.
Also, to be legal, there may be instances where you need to have the ADF
equipment on board.


I thought that an IFR GPS was a legal substitute for an ADF in ALL cases????


An IFR GPS *with a current database* is a leagal substitue for an ADF.

(Currently in MI with a current Garmin West/Central DB. Guess where the
West/Central DB ends. )

--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Hood River, OR

  #4  
Old August 25th 04, 07:34 PM
Dave Butler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

An IFR GPS *with a current database* is a leagal substitue for an ADF.

The requirement for a current database, if any, comes from the Approved Flight
Manual Supplement. Not all AFMSs have this requirement, but most do. You have to
read the AFMS for -that- airplane. Many UPS GX50/60 installs used boiler-plate
AFMS verbage that does not include the requirement for a current database.
Instead it requires only that the PIC determines that the procedure in the
database matches the procedure as currently published, or something like that.

Furthermore, an IFR GPS can be a legal substitute for an ADF for many
operations, but not all. AIM 1-1-19:

"The GPS Approach Overlay Program is an authorization for pilots to use GPS
avionics under IFR for flying designated nonprecision instrument approach
procedures, except LOC, LDA, and simplified directional facility (SDF)
procedures. These procedures are now identified by the name of the procedure and
"or GPS" (e.g., VOR/DME or GPS RWY 15). Other previous types of overlays have
either been converted to this format or replaced with stand-alone procedures.
Only approaches contained in the current onboard navigation database are
authorized. The navigation database may contain information about nonoverlay
approach procedures that is intended to be used to enhance position orientation,
generally by providing a map, while flying these approaches using conventional
NAVAIDs. This approach information should not be confused with a GPS overlay
approach (see the receiver operating manual, AFM, or AFM Supplement for details
on how to identify these approaches in the navigation database)."








  #5  
Old August 25th 04, 08:25 PM
Frank Stutzman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dave Butler wrote:
An IFR GPS *with a current database* is a leagal substitue for an ADF.


The requirement for a current database, if any, comes from the Approved Flight
Manual Supplement. Not all AFMSs have this requirement, but most do. You have to
read the AFMS for -that- airplane. Many UPS GX50/60 installs used boiler-plate
AFMS verbage that does not include the requirement for a current database.
Instead it requires only that the PIC determines that the procedure in the
database matches the procedure as currently published, or something like that.


True. The AFMS for my 430 installation does require a current DB and I
had forgotten that not all were that way.

My comment was more to the fact that the database has to be current for
the approach (i.e. the approach or waypoint must be in the database). As
I mentioned earlier, I'm currently visting outside of my normal database
coverage area. As I don't have the northern Michigan approaches in the
database, I can't do a GPS approach. Nor can I do any approach that
utilizes a NDB. Kinda limits my options.

Its the first time in the two years of flying behind the 430 that wish I
had kept my working ADF.





--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Hood River, OR

  #6  
Old August 25th 04, 08:42 PM
Dave Butler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Frank Stutzman wrote:
As I don't have the northern Michigan approaches in the
database, I can't do a GPS approach. Nor can I do any approach that
utilizes a NDB. Kinda limits my options.


I wouldn't mind being in N Mich right now, with or without database :-)

Dave


  #7  
Old August 25th 04, 10:10 PM
PaulaJay1
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Frank Stutzman
writes:

Its the first time in the two years of flying behind the 430 that wish I
had kept my working ADF.



I think that Canada still has NDB approaches that do not have a GPS overlay and
need am ADF to legally do them.

Chuck
  #8  
Old August 26th 04, 04:30 AM
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Frank Stutzman wrote:

Dude wrote:

Whether or not the Apollo units are a good idea or not is not something I
will address. Don't forget that they are essentially "orphaned" units.
Also, to be legal, there may be instances where you need to have the ADF
equipment on board.



I thought that an IFR GPS was a legal substitute for an ADF in ALL cases????



An IFR GPS *with a current database* is a leagal substitue for an ADF.


Not necessary for the GX units.

  #9  
Old August 26th 04, 01:22 AM
Ron Rosenfeld
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:49:11 GMT, "Dude" wrote:

I thought that an IFR GPS was a legal substitute for an ADF in ALL cases????


I don't know all of the in's and out's that apply to TSO129 certified
equipment, so my conclusions may be incorrect.

My understanding is that if you are flying IFR, and have a TSO129 box, and
require an alternate, the AIM says that:

"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."

So if you are choosing an NDB approach at your alternate airport, you would
need to have a functioning ADF receiver on board.


--ron
  #10  
Old August 26th 04, 04:38 AM
Tom S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Dude" wrote in message
...
Whether or not the Apollo units are a good idea or not is not something

I
will address. Don't forget that they are essentially "orphaned" units.
Also, to be legal, there may be instances where you need to have the ADF
equipment on board.


I thought that an IFR GPS was a legal substitute for an ADF in ALL

cases????

What do you mean by "ALL"? Some ILS approaches still require an ADF (i.e.,
BHB ILS 22).


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 40 October 3rd 08 03:13 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 December 2nd 04 07:00 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 June 2nd 04 07:17 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 May 1st 04 07:29 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 1 January 2nd 04 09:02 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.