The Search Goes On

[blueldr]

What the hell? If all you want to do is get above a shallow layer to on top or come down through a shallow layer to a relatively high ceiling, all you really NEED is a needle, ball, and air speed. Man, if you're gonna fly these old timey machines, you gotta have guts!

[GAHorn]

bluEldr,...you've got a real knack for cuttin' to the quick!

I once got caught above a solid undercast 7,000 feet thick, at 9500 MSL over Birmingham in my Aeronca Chief (no electrical and only a handheld radio). It had a lit tle 2-inch venturi that drove the only gyro, a needle-and-ball. It was nearing dusk and soon would be dark. (The forecast had been horrifically-missed and instead of clear-to-scattered, BHM had solid overcast.) I was on my way from Bryan-College Station, TX to Fairburn, GA (just SW of ATL).

I didn't like the idea but had little choice but to call up BHM appch and admit my problem. They gave me a block of 1500 MSL to 9,000 MSL and told me to report reaching VFR. Let me tell you, a "modern" pilot on needle/ball for a 15-minute descent seemed to take 24-HOURS!

But, indeed,...it works!

I was not advocating illegal IFR operations in my previous post. I was discussing "possibility" versus "pocketbook". If you plan on using ground-nav-aids for IFR flight you'd best have at least the requirements of FAR 91.205(d). The only way one can conceivably operate without IFR certified nav radio equipt. is while on vectors or while in uncontrolled airspace. I am not advocating anyone use a non-ifr certified GPS for anything other than "monitoring" flight progress.

FAR91.205(d)
(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).

[busav8or]

Dayam!!! Now I don't know whether I'm an idiot or gutless! I'll have to get back to you on that one, blueldr! Thanks for the responses to my maybe newbie questions, but I've been out of touch with GA for about 25 years! I've gotten a lot of great advice on what to look for in my, hopefully soon, step back in.

Happy New Year, everybody!!!
Joe

[jrenwick]

bluEldr,...you've got a real knack for cuttin' to the quick!

...

But, indeed,...it works!

The one time I had to do this was flying one of a loose formation of two identical VFR-only airplanes across about 50 miles of water. The weather was clear but a little hazy, visibility about ten miles. As soon as we were over the water, the horizon disappeared. My airplane had a T&B, and I had a Garmin GPS III Pilot for a simulated HSI display. It was tricky to do this while holding "formation" (a couple hundred feet distant) from another aircraft also flying by needle/ball and airspeed, but it worked out OK. Everything got instantly better when the opposite shore appeared!

[GAHorn]

Dayam!!! Now I don't know whether I'm an idiot or gutless! I'll have to get back to you on that one, blueldr! Thanks for the responses to my maybe newbie questions, but I've been out of touch with GA for about 25 years! I've gotten a lot of great advice on what to look for in my, hopefully soon, step back in.

Happy New Year, everybody!!!
Joe

HA! Joe,..You're gonna fit right-in with this crowd!!

Back to your original msg-question: A straight-forward answer is... you probably only "need" a VOR receiver to get "light IFR" capable. Anything else you add will be "whistles and bells".

It sounds as if you are a professional pilot and so one of your concerns might be the implications of enforcement actions upon your ability to perform work at the real job. Fear is a powerful motivation for many of our actions.
But to be completely practical, there will be none of the imagined bad things happen until something bad happens (like an accident/incident instigating an inquiry.) No one is going to investigate your aircraft equipment/currency status simply because you filed and flew a flight plan, or was enroute and asked for a climb/descent to VFR or a vector to appch.
The occasional ramp-check (I've had only a couple in 40 years of aviatin' ) will ask for pilot/med certs and look at the Airworthiness/Registration certificates of the airplane, and that is the end of it. Yes, you'll be asked if the aircraft mx records are aboard, and NO, they shouldn't be. Thank you, Sir, and have a nice day.

That Garmin 250/XL is a fine radio and will do a lot of "off route, point-to-point" navigation for you. It'll even get you over a VOR and track an airway as accurately as a VOR receiver will, and provide distance information and airspace depiction to boot. But you knew that.

You'll also need to keep your other aircraft systems up-to-date, i.e., 24-month pitot/static system and 24-month txdr/altitude-encoder system inspections. (See FAR 91.411 and 91.413)

[hilltop170]

Great discussion. I'm hoping to install a 430W in my 170. By the time I'm done with the rebuild they'll cost around $100. One thing that has been neglected in this conversation has been the transponder and encoder. I was planning on installing a Garmin GTX320 but after reading this article by the late Tom Rogers I'm not so sure anymore. I was thinking the digital Garmin would be more reliable than a King with the cavity tube. The price to replace a cavity tube on the ubiquitous KT-76A is around $800-900. Any thoughts?

There is no need to replace a functioning audio panel or transponder that will pass certification. If it works, it works. Otherwise I would just go with personal preference.

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

If I was replacing a transponder, and the only reason as Richard points out is the one I have broke hard and is not repairable, I might be inclined to go with the Garmin transponder in order to show some traffic on my other Garmin products. Something else to think about.

Joe it's OK to be a gutless idiot. I'm a gutless idiot a lot off times. Yes hard to believe when I'm seen blasting off when others won't. And the fact I fly helicopters let alone MedEvac is just to much for some to consider. I'm always evaluating whether I'm an idiot for not being more gutless.

I think you have realized we have a wide range of experience here at the forum and the information all has to be considered and tempered as you think appropriate.

[KS170A]

I was planning on installing a Garmin GTX320 but after reading this article by the late Tom Rogers I'm not so sure anymore. I was thinking the digital Garmin would be more reliable than a King with the cavity tube. The price to replace a cavity tube on the ubiquitous KT-76A is around $800-900. Any thoughts?

I must say I installed a GTX 320 in my 170A 10 years ago, and it has performed flawlessly since installation. The GNC250 XL I installed at the same time, on the other hand, had to go back to Garmin for a new com transmitter a few years ago. I also get lots of static interference from high-powered FM antennas in a few areas. Other than that, I've been happy enough with both units.

[GAHorn]

If I was replacing a transponder, and the only reason as Richard points out is the one I have broke hard and is not repairable, I might be inclined to go with the Garmin transponder in order to show some traffic on my other Garmin products. Something else to think about.....

I'll be danged if I"m paying $5,000 for a TIS enabled txdr that only works in certain high-density areas. If my txdr suffers a "hard-over" I'd be more inclined to simply buy another used unit identical to the one that failed and "slide it in!"

[blueldr]

George,
When you got hung up on top over BHM in the Chief, how come you didn't use the famous, time tested method of "Spin down through and recover at break out."?

As it was, how long did it take to loosen up the pucker string?

[hilltop170]

BL-
I did a 12 turn spin in an old straight-tail C-150 one time, lost 6000'. I would not recommend it.

[GAHorn]

George,
When you got hung up on top over BHM in the Chief, how come you didn't use the famous, time tested method of "Spin down through and recover at break out."?

As it was, how long did it take to loosen up the pucker string?

The ceiling was unknown in my exact area as I was still just SW of BHM in hills. Ceiling at BHM was reported at 1500 but I wasn't certain how low it was directly below me. (I have done the spin-down once before in uncontrolled airspace...when there was still some of that around in South Texas...in a "demonstration" to a student. But there was a known 3500' ceiling in So. TX and we still didn't get recovered fully in the Cessna 150 (swept-tail) until 2,000 MSL. I didn't want to do that in the Chief. (Funny you brought that subject up because I recalled the C-150 event as I pondered calling up BHM appch and having to admit my problem to them.) I don't know if you've ever spun a Chief ...but after 3-turns that airplane got downright scarey. It would groan, creak, and shudder and act as if it were going to flatten out, ...then it'd suddenly pop-over onto it's back and start all-over again for 3-turns,...presumeably for another 3-turns, etc etc. I don't know for certain because after the first pop-over I was through experimenting and stopped the excersize. Good thing there was no radio in the airplane because if I'd had to talk to anyone I'd have lost my "Chuck Yeager" voice.)

[busav8or]

Another question (or two). Are newer ('54 and beyond) 170's supposed to have a, for lack of a better term, "scoop" in the cabin heater air inlet? I noticed on a '52 model that it was there, but not on the '54 that I saw. I know the systems were redesigned at some point in '53 so maybe they did away with it? Also, is it a big deal to replace the oil filter screen with a spin on filter? Not sure yet whether the '54 has had it done, but just wondering how hard (expensive) it is to do.

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

To the best of my knowledge there is no scoop when Cessna went to the later 3" scat which was done when they went to the new cowl design.

It is not a big deal to replace the oil screen with a filter on any of the models. I'm not familiar with the Cessna filter adapter or how it is approved but several members have that. I as well as probably most people who have a filter, have the F&M filter adapter which is STC'd. www.fm-enterprises.com/product.html

[busav8or]

Thanks, Bruce. After my post I got hold of an IPC and looked at the baffles for the pre and post '53 models. You're right; after the mid year redesign, they did away with the scoop.