IFR certified

[Gman]

Biscuit - you will find more than a few IFR certified 170s owned by members of this forum. Some IFR 170s have vacuum pumps, others have the venturi powered gyros. The Venturis powered gyros tend to be the Artificial Horizon and the Directional Gyro - most of us back up the venturi powered gyros with an electric turn and bank indicator. I have the venturi powered A.I. and D.G. with the eletric T&B. I had a partner in the aircraft once upon a time and was able to install a IFR Garmin 430. In addition I have a King Nav/Com - both OBS are loc/Glide slope. I fly often IFR . The venturi system seems to function realibly - however, stay away from icing encounters.

Hi - I am a little unclear about the IFR 'certification' versus being IFR-equipped. Just adding some avionics does not make the airplane IFR certified, does it? I remember reading somewhere that the attitude indicator needs to be spooled up prior to the take off roll, which can't be done with a vaccum powered one. Also, with out the pitot heat - how do you plan on flying in the clouds? Trying to avoid icing conditions is one thing, but you will get icing nevertheles and the airspeed indication will go first...
Due to the 170 age the airplane is not certified according to VFR, IFR, DAY, NIGHT per POH. I guess one needs the proper logbook entries (337,STC?) to add the avionics and a pitot static check?
Can anyone shed some light on this who has done it?

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

The only thing that makes an airplane "IFR Certified" is the pitot static system check per FAR 91.411. That is it.

"IFR equipped" is very subjective. First you need all the equipment listed in 91.205. This is nothing fancy and is found in most 170s

You would also have to have some means of navigation. This could be a single ADF, or a single VOR or a single IFR certified Loran or a single IFR certified GPS. In the case of the Loran or GPS it is not enough that they meet a IFR TSO but the installation in that particular aircraft also has to be approved and certified. In the case of the VOR you would also have to satisfy the VOR check required by 91.171.

While lots of people won't fly IFR with anything less than a full complement of ADF,DME,VOR,GPS and auto pilot, it is possible to fly IFR with a Single ADF receiver. If is only necessary to have the navigation equipment required for the type of flight you plan to fly. You can't file and fly a VOR approach without a VOR receiver.

There is no requirement for the gyros to be spooled up before departing and there is no requirement for anti-icing such as a heated pitot.

[Gman]

Bruce,

thanks for clearing this up.

[GAHorn]

It's not accurate to say the 170 was never originally certified for IFR day/night... because it WAS ...as long as the equipment list was met. (Back then the req'd equipment was a Turn and Bank...today it includes a gyro-horizon.... See the FAR's.)


To my knowledge, there is no stand-alone Loran or GPS that qualifies for IFR navigation. In order to fly IFR along Victor airways... a VOR is required equipment. YOu can have a Loran or GPS in addition to a VOR... but a VOR receiver is still req'd.

In order to fly COLORED airways (now obsolete in the U.S.) an ADF could be utilized as stand alone equipment, but since there are no colored airways in the U.S. anymore, a sole ADF is no longer qualified as stand alone equipment as a navigation aid for ground-based navigation.

Obviously, certain additional requirements must also be met, such as ELT, Transponder and Altitude encoding (and their req'd bi-annual certifications) and pitot/static bi-annual certifications.
(Paragraphs b and c mentiond in the second sentence below are the day/night VFR req'd equipment.)

91.205 (d) Instrument flight rules. For IFR flight, the following instruments and equipment are required:

(1) Instruments and equipment specified in paragraph (b) of this section, and, for night flight, instruments and equipment specified in paragraph (c) of this section.

(2) Two-way radio communication and navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown.

(3) Gyroscopic rate-of-turn indicator, except on the following aircraft:

(i) Airplanes with a third attitude instrument system usable through flight attitudes of 360 degrees of pitch and roll and installed in accordance with the instrument requirements prescribed in §121.305(j) of this chapter; and

(ii) Rotorcraft with a third attitude instrument system usable through flight attitudes of ±80 degrees of pitch and ±120 degrees of roll and installed in accordance with §29.1303(g) of this chapter.

(4) Slip-skid indicator.

(5) Sensitive altimeter adjustable for barometric pressure.

(6) A clock displaying hours, minutes, and seconds with a sweep-second pointer or digital presentation.

(7) Generator or alternator of adequate capacity.

(8) Gyroscopic pitch and bank indicator (artificial horizon).

(9) Gyroscopic direction indicator (directional gyro or equivalent).

All FAR's may be found at:
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/te ... rv2_02.tpl

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

George,

You have much more experience than me and your mind tends to be much more of steal trap for these types of details. Unless you know of a change in recent years you can file and fly an entire IFR flight with just an ADF. Is it practical. NO.

At Quakertown (UKT), my home airport we have an NDB approach. I can file from the airport to the NDB direct then reverse course and shoot the NDB 29 back to Quakertown. No other navigation equipment necessary.

I can't say if there every was an approach certified Loran but I'm sure there was an enroute certified Loran. Remember you do not have to end an IFR flight with an approach.

The only restrictions I know about in the FARs on the use of a GPS for enroute and approaches are these. An alternate approach if required can not rely on GPS. You must have RAIM at the FAF to continue a GPS approach but that doesn't restrict you from using just GPS to that point and no answer as to what to do next.

Now after some thought I looked in a sample copy of an AFM supplement written by Garmin to use as a base to write your own AFM supplement for individual aircraft. In this sample it does say that the aircraft must have other approved navigation equipment installed and operating appropriate to the route of flight. Again this is not a FAR or actually even approved but it is a sample of what has been approved. I used it to write my AFM supplement for the Garmin 155 installed in my 170. I did not follow the sample verbatim and there is no requirement to do so. My supplement was approved. I do not know if there is other guidance that requires this wording or if my supplement has it. So it is entirely possible that you could have an aircraft without such a limitation and others with it depending on who wrote the supplement and who approved it.

This wording, "other approved navigation equipment installed and operating appropriate to the route of flight" also I think leaves open some interpretation. What if the route of flight has no other land based navigation systems that can be used? There wouldn't be any other navigation equipment appropriate so what else would you have to have.

Yes I am splitting hairs here. I think it would be a poor choice to fly IFR in IMC with only one type of navigation equipment but not illegal. Remember there is no requirement to have two VOR receivers on board to fly IFR using VORs or to use VOR approaches. What if your single VOR receiver goes dead while your IFR in IMC? Why would flying with a single GPS be different?

[Lucky]

Anyone have any experience with the VAL INS-422 integrated VOR, glide slope, and marker beacon? I've heard it's not as good (poorer reception and clumsy interface) as a conventional radio and instrument, but it's a LOT cheaper and will save me from altering my panel too much...something I want to avoid if I can. With my King 155 it would give me two VOR's and one com radio...plus I have two non-ifr gps for situational awareness. Anyone out there think it's foolish to fly IFR with only one com radio?

My goal is to get my instrument rating, and this seems to be the easiest way to bring the plane up to snuff. I've thought of putting the money towards a IFR gps which would probably be more practical, but it wouldn't allow me to get my rating in my plane, as the VOR navigation is required to get the ticket.

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

What do you mean when you say 'up to snuff". Two VORs are not required.


You need to demonstrate a precision and a non-precision approach as well as holding. You need a single VOR reciever, a glideslode and in most case i can think of a marker beacon.

Do you have a glide slope with your King 155? Do you have a marker beacon? If not I'd add the glideslope to the 155 and add a marker beacon either in an audio panel or by itself. i wouldn't worry about having 2 com radios. If you are worried carry a hand held radio.

[Robert Eilers]

Back when I was a starving flight instructor the Winter weather would just about bankrupt us in Northern Calif. In order to make it through the Winter I rounded up the only Cessna 150 with localizer capability, and all of the 91.205 instruments, and started filing IFR to BFR with my basic students and shooting the localizer approach back in. The typical Winter weather consisted on low cielings, good visibility underneath and tops around 2,000. I would ask the Approach Controller to I.D. the outer marker and I would back that up with a cross radial (published on the approach). The training area was generally VFR. I was able to continue making slave wages and my students actually got some IFR experience in the bargain. When the boss figured out what I was doing he equipped all the 150's with localizer and three light marker beacons. Amazing how inventive you become when your stomach starts growling.

[jrenwick]

I don't have experience with the VAL NAV units. I have the COM 760 in my Swift. I recently sent it in for repairs because the auto-dimming LED display was dim all the time, and the tiny little frequency selector switches were very hit-or-miss. They replaced the dimmer photocell and four switches. The switches cost $20 apiece, and the whole bill was $278. The new switches are only somewhat better than the old one -- you often have to push it multiple times to get a number to change by one (they're momentary contact, but they don't always make contact when pushed). This was the second time that old radio had been back to VAL for work, and between me and the previous owner we've got more money in it than it would have cost to buy an ICOM or similar COM unit originally.

If the NAV unit you're looking at has the same little toggle switches, I think you're going to find them annoying.

IFR avionics really need to be installed by a certified avionics shop. By the time you've paid them for the labor, saving a few bucks on what you install won't seem like such a savings. My 170's panel had a KX125 nav/com without glideslope and a very old Apollo COM unit. I wanted to make it IFR with glideslope and an IFR-certified GPS. The least expensive solution turned out to be to replace the Apollo COM with a Garmin GNS430, and I'm very happy with the result.

As we say, this is my opinion, worth what you paid for it!

Best Regards,

John

[blueldr]

I'm kind of surprized to hear about the maintenance problems with the Val Com760 radio. I installed mine in 1990 and it has performed flawlessly ever since. The signal strength has always been exceptionally strong and reception clear and crisp. It has received no maintenance. It replaced a King radio that two trips to the shop failed to repair yet cost more than the new Val radio.

[Kyle]

Good Evening Everyone. First a quick update, in my long quest to update my panel I have found an 8 hole panel AND the overlay from a fellow member in NJ. This was a GREAT find . A buddy is installing one of the Aspen avionics units in his 172, hence I end up with his DG, and can replace my original 400 lb. DG with his standard size unit in the new updated panel 8 hole panel.

The previous short list of required equipment listed a gyroscopic turn and bank, mine is an original electric unit. Do I have it correctly that it only indicates the gyros are powered electricaly and that unit meets this requirement? Also can your collective knowledge tell me if their are any restrictions (Field of view) as to which instruments I place in which holes?

The goal is user friendly locations, but depth behind the panel such as in the two center stacked holes makes a diff.
Thanks and hope you are all having an adult beverage after the day and nights events...

Regards,
Kyle T.

[hilltop170]

Kyle-
This arrangement works well in actual IFR, I have over 150 hours actual IFR with it.

IMG_8249_1_1.JPG

[GAHorn]

I'm glad to see you changed your shoes, Richard. Those little dainty feet are much better suited to black.

[GAHorn]

....The previous short list of required equipment listed a gyroscopic turn and bank, mine is an original electric unit. Do I have it correctly that it only indicates the gyros are powered electricaly and that unit meets this requirement? Also can your collective knowledge tell me if their are any restrictions (Field of view) as to which instruments I place in which holes? ...Regards,Kyle T.

Having vacuum gyro horizon/compass and electric T&B meet the requirements of separate power sources. (As would a vacuum T&B on a distinctly separate vacuum source.) The only other requirement for placement is that they be in the "primary" field of view, which would be the upper instrument panel and (anecdotally) within 30-degrees left/right of the pilot station (-presumeably the left seat.)

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

The only other requirement for placement is that they be in the "primary" field of view, which would be the upper instrument panel and (anecdotally) within 30-degrees left/right of the pilot station (-presumeably the left seat.)

I've said this before George, you continually amaze me at the amount of information you seem to be able to put your fingers on in no time at all.

Tell me did you just remember this bit of detail from some long ago reading, remember were to look to find it, or just make it up?

How ever you came across it, it sounds good.