KX155 KX 155A Anybody know the difference?

[Mike Rapoport]

The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to do.
What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the KX155A
and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching relay to
allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to decide what
to do.

My options are:

A:
#1 Garmin 430
#2 KX155
Get rid of the "GPS/NAV" switch/annunciator box

B:
Same as A but with 530. Pricey, but I could just buy the tray and
connectors and shuttle the 530 in my MU-2 back and forth until Garmin has
WAAS and then buy a 530A for the MU-2. This has the advantage of presumably
saving the cost of the WAAS upgrade thereby reducing the 530 premium
somewhat.

C:
#1 Currently installed 300XL.
#2 KX 155 or 165 I would prefer the 165 since I can get rid of the converter
box that drives the HSI.
Keep the GPS/NAV switch/annunciator box

The advantage of going with a 430 or 530 is that I have flown them for 800+
hrs and am comfortable with the operating logic. I can't say the same about
the 300X:L.

Cost is an issue. This is a second airplane and I anticipate using it 95%
VFR. I would rather spend the money on floats or skis :-). Since the
airplane may be left unattended in the backcountry for days at a time, I
would also like avionics that are not very attractive to a thief.

What do you think?

Mike
MU-2

[zatatime]

On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 01:03:13 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> wrote:

>The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
>dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to do.
>What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the KX155A
>and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching relay to
>allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to decide what
>to do.
>
>My options are:
>
>A:
>#1 Garmin 430
>#2 KX155
>Get rid of the "GPS/NAV" switch/annunciator box
>
>B:
>Same as A but with 530. Pricey, but I could just buy the tray and
>connectors and shuttle the 530 in my MU-2 back and forth until Garmin has
>WAAS and then buy a 530A for the MU-2. This has the advantage of presumably
>saving the cost of the WAAS upgrade thereby reducing the 530 premium
>somewhat.
>
>C:
>#1 Currently installed 300XL.
>#2 KX 155 or 165 I would prefer the 165 since I can get rid of the converter
>box that drives the HSI.
>Keep the GPS/NAV switch/annunciator box
>
>The advantage of going with a 430 or 530 is that I have flown them for 800+
>hrs and am comfortable with the operating logic. I can't say the same about
>the 300X:L.
>
>Cost is an issue. This is a second airplane and I anticipate using it 95%
>VFR. I would rather spend the money on floats or skis :-). Since the
>airplane may be left unattended in the backcountry for days at a time, I
>would also like avionics that are not very attractive to a thief.
>
>What do you think?
>
>Mike
>MU-2
>
>
Slightly tongue in cheek, but not entirely rediculous.

A. Make the Courier a 100% VFR airplane for a while, bring a
handheld, and spend the money on skiis or floats. When the WAAS
technology comes out, you'll have more money again (hopefully) and you
can do the radio upgrade once and the way you want it.

B. Buy a used nav/comm cheap that will fit in the same slot, and use
the money you save on skiis or floats. This 'll keep the IFR
abilities and still get you the skiis or floats.

May not be entirely practical but just thought I'd throw it out there.
I think you can tell I like the idea of added use with skiis or
floats. :)

z

PS. The 155A replaces the 155 which is no longer available. It has an
internal CDI (which may help you get rid of your switching relay), 32
program sets, self dimming panel, yoke mounted frequency flip flop,
timers, and some other goodies. HTH.

[Mike Rapoport]

"zatatime" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 01:03:13 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> > wrote:
>
> >The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
> >dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to do.
> >What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the
KX155A
> >and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching relay
to
> >allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to decide
what
> >to do.
> >
> >My options are:
> >
> >A:
> >#1 Garmin 430
> >#2 KX155
> >Get rid of the "GPS/NAV" switch/annunciator box
> >
> >B:
> >Same as A but with 530. Pricey, but I could just buy the tray and
> >connectors and shuttle the 530 in my MU-2 back and forth until Garmin has
> >WAAS and then buy a 530A for the MU-2. This has the advantage of
presumably
> >saving the cost of the WAAS upgrade thereby reducing the 530 premium
> >somewhat.
> >
> >C:
> >#1 Currently installed 300XL.
> >#2 KX 155 or 165 I would prefer the 165 since I can get rid of the
converter
> >box that drives the HSI.
> >Keep the GPS/NAV switch/annunciator box
> >
> >The advantage of going with a 430 or 530 is that I have flown them for
800+
> >hrs and am comfortable with the operating logic. I can't say the same
about
> >the 300X:L.
> >
> >Cost is an issue. This is a second airplane and I anticipate using it
95%
> >VFR. I would rather spend the money on floats or skis :-). Since the
> >airplane may be left unattended in the backcountry for days at a time, I
> >would also like avionics that are not very attractive to a thief.
> >
> >What do you think?
> >
> >Mike
> >MU-2
> >
> >
> Slightly tongue in cheek, but not entirely rediculous.
>
> A. Make the Courier a 100% VFR airplane for a while, bring a
> handheld, and spend the money on skiis or floats. When the WAAS
> technology comes out, you'll have more money again (hopefully) and you
> can do the radio upgrade once and the way you want it.
>
> B. Buy a used nav/comm cheap that will fit in the same slot, and use
> the money you save on skiis or floats. This 'll keep the IFR
> abilities and still get you the skiis or floats.
>
> May not be entirely practical but just thought I'd throw it out there.
> I think you can tell I like the idea of added use with skiis or
> floats. :)
>
> z
>
> PS. The 155A replaces the 155 which is no longer available. It has an
> internal CDI (which may help you get rid of your switching relay), 32
> program sets, self dimming panel, yoke mounted frequency flip flop,
> timers, and some other goodies. HTH.

Thanks for your thoughts! Don't worry, I'm buying the skis and floats!

Mike
MU-2

[Nathan Young]

You can update the looks of your KX155 by ordering a new front panel
(which includes the display). I see ads for this in Trade-a-Plane,
but you could probably order from Bendix-King too.

I never knew the deltas between the variations of King's Nav-Coms, so
I spent a bit of time on their site
(https://www3.bendixking.com/static/brochures/index.jsp). Here's what
I distilled from the info:

-KX155, 155A, 165, and 165A are all 10W radios.
-All are 760 channels COM and 200 channels Nav (exception being 165A
which can be ordered with 8.33kHz spacing).

Difference between the 155s and 165s are primarily the integration of
a VOR/LOC converter in the 165. As well the KX165 adds a digital
radial readout (accessed by pulling out the Nav tuner button).

The A suffix indicates a newer design that supports some cool
microprocessor-oriented features:
-Programmed COM channels
-Stuck mic indications
-Timer
-Integrated CDI

Also, If you go with option B below. Be sure to investigate how many
insertion cycles the connectors on the 530 can take. I would be
surprised if they are designed with that kind of mission in mind. It
certainly wouldn't hurt to transfer it between planes a few times, but
after a few hundred, who knows.


On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 01:03:13 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> wrote:

>The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
>dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to do.
>What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the KX155A
>and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching relay to
>allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to decide what
>to do.
>
>My options are:
>
>A:
>#1 Garmin 430
>#2 KX155
>Get rid of the "GPS/NAV" switch/annunciator box
>
>B:
>Same as A but with 530. Pricey, but I could just buy the tray and
>connectors and shuttle the 530 in my MU-2 back and forth until Garmin has
>WAAS and then buy a 530A for the MU-2. This has the advantage of presumably
>saving the cost of the WAAS upgrade thereby reducing the 530 premium
>somewhat.
>
>C:
>#1 Currently installed 300XL.
>#2 KX 155 or 165 I would prefer the 165 since I can get rid of the converter
>box that drives the HSI.
>Keep the GPS/NAV switch/annunciator box
>
>The advantage of going with a 430 or 530 is that I have flown them for 800+
>hrs and am comfortable with the operating logic. I can't say the same about
>the 300X:L.
>
>Cost is an issue. This is a second airplane and I anticipate using it 95%
>VFR. I would rather spend the money on floats or skis :-). Since the
>airplane may be left unattended in the backcountry for days at a time, I
>would also like avionics that are not very attractive to a thief.
>
>What do you think?
>
>Mike
>MU-2
>
>

[Mike Rapoport]

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
> You can update the looks of your KX155 by ordering a new front panel
> (which includes the display). I see ads for this in Trade-a-Plane,
> but you could probably order from Bendix-King too.
>
> I never knew the deltas between the variations of King's Nav-Coms, so
> I spent a bit of time on their site
> (https://www3.bendixking.com/static/brochures/index.jsp). Here's what
> I distilled from the info:
>
> -KX155, 155A, 165, and 165A are all 10W radios.
> -All are 760 channels COM and 200 channels Nav (exception being 165A
> which can be ordered with 8.33kHz spacing).
>
> Difference between the 155s and 165s are primarily the integration of
> a VOR/LOC converter in the 165. As well the KX165 adds a digital
> radial readout (accessed by pulling out the Nav tuner button).
>
> The A suffix indicates a newer design that supports some cool
> microprocessor-oriented features:
> -Programmed COM channels
> -Stuck mic indications
> -Timer
> -Integrated CDI
>
> Also, If you go with option B below. Be sure to investigate how many
> insertion cycles the connectors on the 530 can take. I would be
> surprised if they are designed with that kind of mission in mind. It
> certainly wouldn't hurt to transfer it between planes a few times, but
> after a few hundred, who knows.

Thanks. Good point! I hadn't considered insertion/extraction limits.

Mike
MU-2


>
> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 01:03:13 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> > wrote:
>
> >The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
> >dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to do.
> >What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the
KX155A
> >and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching relay
to
> >allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to decide
what
> >to do.
> >
> >My options are:
> >
> >A:
> >#1 Garmin 430
> >#2 KX155
> >Get rid of the "GPS/NAV" switch/annunciator box
> >
> >B:
> >Same as A but with 530. Pricey, but I could just buy the tray and
> >connectors and shuttle the 530 in my MU-2 back and forth until Garmin has
> >WAAS and then buy a 530A for the MU-2. This has the advantage of
presumably
> >saving the cost of the WAAS upgrade thereby reducing the 530 premium
> >somewhat.
> >
> >C:
> >#1 Currently installed 300XL.
> >#2 KX 155 or 165 I would prefer the 165 since I can get rid of the
converter
> >box that drives the HSI.
> >Keep the GPS/NAV switch/annunciator box
> >
> >The advantage of going with a 430 or 530 is that I have flown them for
800+
> >hrs and am comfortable with the operating logic. I can't say the same
about
> >the 300X:L.
> >
> >Cost is an issue. This is a second airplane and I anticipate using it
95%
> >VFR. I would rather spend the money on floats or skis :-). Since the
> >airplane may be left unattended in the backcountry for days at a time, I
> >would also like avionics that are not very attractive to a thief.
> >
> >What do you think?
> >
> >Mike
> >MU-2
> >
> >
>

[Tom S.]

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
> Difference between the 155s and 165s are primarily the integration of
> a VOR/LOC converter in the 165. As well the KX165 adds a digital
> radial readout (accessed by pulling out the Nav tuner button).
>
> The A suffix indicates a newer design that supports some cool
> microprocessor-oriented features:
> -Programmed COM channels
> -Stuck mic indications
> -Timer
> -Integrated CDI
>
> Also, If you go with option B below. Be sure to investigate how many
> insertion cycles the connectors on the 530 can take. I would be
> surprised if they are designed with that kind of mission in mind. It
> certainly wouldn't hurt to transfer it between planes a few times, but
> after a few hundred, who knows.

Wouldn't that be reduced by the 430/530 preselecting frequencies which are
then "flip-flopped"?

[Fly]

I wish I knew.
In fact I just dropped one off at the avionics shop. Hit the transmit
key and the display goes blank, and the unit goes silent. Huh?
Kent Felkins



"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
> dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to do.
> What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the
KX155A
> and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching relay
to
> allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to decide what
> to do.
>
> My options are:
>
> A:
> #1 Garmin 430
> #2 KX155
> Get rid of the "GPS/NAV" switch/annunciator box
>
> B:
> Same as A but with 530. Pricey, but I could just buy the tray and
> connectors and shuttle the 530 in my MU-2 back and forth until Garmin has
> WAAS and then buy a 530A for the MU-2. This has the advantage of
presumably
> saving the cost of the WAAS upgrade thereby reducing the 530 premium
> somewhat.
>
> C:
> #1 Currently installed 300XL.
> #2 KX 155 or 165 I would prefer the 165 since I can get rid of the
converter
> box that drives the HSI.
> Keep the GPS/NAV switch/annunciator box
>
> The advantage of going with a 430 or 530 is that I have flown them for
800+
> hrs and am comfortable with the operating logic. I can't say the same
about
> the 300X:L.
>
> Cost is an issue. This is a second airplane and I anticipate using it 95%
> VFR. I would rather spend the money on floats or skis :-). Since the
> airplane may be left unattended in the backcountry for days at a time, I
> would also like avionics that are not very attractive to a thief.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>
>
>

[Ben Jackson]

In article et>,
Mike Rapoport > wrote:
>The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
>dust.

In what way? Your cheapest option is probably to get it repaired.
The displays in particular seem to have a much shorter lifespan than
the rest of the radio. After that it's probably the harness or the
antenna/connection.

Never buy today what you can put off buying until tommorow. ;-)

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[kage]

THE major difference between the KX-155/165 and KX-155A/165A is this:

http://www.faa.gov/certification/aircraft/av-info/dst/8400-11.doc

>>> 3. Harmonic interference (12th and 13th harmonic) from VHF
transmissions on 121.150, 121.175, 121.200, 131.250, 131.275, and 131.300
MHz has been observed to adversely affect reception of the GPS signal. Low
pass or notch filters (with an insertion loss of 2 Db or less or the
aircraft VHF COM radio must be re-certified) installed at the output of the
VHF transmitter to attenuate the undesired harmonic signal, or modification
of the VHF transmitter to improve internal harmonic attenuation, may be
required. Shorted stubs, of appropriate lengths, could also possibly
provide effective filtering and antenna matching." <<<<



The straight 155/165 was designed long before GPS was ever envisioned, and
are very noisy in 12th and 13th harmonics. Most IFR installations with these
radios were made without regard to the interference, with the certifying
pilot either ignorant or lying about the interference.



The "A" model was designed to be free of these interferences.



Other nice features are much better feeling rotary switches, with smoother,
shorter and more precise clicks. Also, the 165A is available with 8.33 MHz
spacing. The US may or may not go to 8.33 spacing, but since Europe already
has the US will probably tow the line, like they did with METARS/TAF. Which
brings up a funny point. I fly all over Europe regularly. IT is very
uncommon to see a proper METAR/TAF report sequence. They report as they damn
well please with any sequence that comes to mind at the moment. To get a
proper sequence you need to fly in the US.



So much for the vaulted "commonality" that was forced down our throats!



Karl





"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
> dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to do.
> What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the
> KX155A
> and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching relay
> to
> allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to decide what
> to do.
>
> My options are:
>
> A:
> #1 Garmin 430
> #2 KX155
> Get rid of the "GPS/NAV" switch/annunciator box
>
> B:
> Same as A but with 530. Pricey, but I could just buy the tray and
> connectors and shuttle the 530 in my MU-2 back and forth until Garmin has
> WAAS and then buy a 530A for the MU-2. This has the advantage of
> presumably
> saving the cost of the WAAS upgrade thereby reducing the 530 premium
> somewhat.
>
> C:
> #1 Currently installed 300XL.
> #2 KX 155 or 165 I would prefer the 165 since I can get rid of the
> converter
> box that drives the HSI.
> Keep the GPS/NAV switch/annunciator box
>
> The advantage of going with a 430 or 530 is that I have flown them for
> 800+
> hrs and am comfortable with the operating logic. I can't say the same
> about
> the 300X:L.
>
> Cost is an issue. This is a second airplane and I anticipate using it 95%
> VFR. I would rather spend the money on floats or skis :-). Since the
> airplane may be left unattended in the backcountry for days at a time, I
> would also like avionics that are not very attractive to a thief.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>
>
>

[Dave Butler]

Mike Rapoport wrote:
> The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
> dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to do.
> What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the KX155A
> and KX165A?

There's a list of the differences between KX155 and KX155A at
http://www.seaerospace.com/king/kx155a.htm
Look for the items in the list with an asterisk.

Dave

[Mike Rapoport]

The display is blank and I can't hear anything on the radio either.

Mike
MU-2

"Ben Jackson" > wrote in message
news:gGSYc.89453$Fg5.30199@attbi_s53...
> In article et>,
> Mike Rapoport > wrote:
> >The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
> >dust.
>
> In what way? Your cheapest option is probably to get it repaired.
> The displays in particular seem to have a much shorter lifespan than
> the rest of the radio. After that it's probably the harness or the
> antenna/connection.
>
> Never buy today what you can put off buying until tommorow. ;-)
>
> --
> Ben Jackson
> >
> http://www.ben.com/

[Aaron Coolidge]

Mike Rapoport > wrote:
: The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
: dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to do.
: What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the KX155A
: and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching relay to
: allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to decide what
: to do.

An additional point: ALL the 'A' suffix units are 28V only. The others may be
either 14V or 28V, depending on the model number.

These radios are available for not too much $$$ used.

As an aside, I think your radio trouble is in the aircraft wiring or the
radio's internal fuse.
--
Aaron Coolidge (N9376J)

[Mike Rapoport]

"Aaron Coolidge" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Rapoport > wrote:
> : The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
> : dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to
do.
> : What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the
KX155A
> : and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching relay
to
> : allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to decide
what
> : to do.
>
> An additional point: ALL the 'A' suffix units are 28V only. The others may
be
> either 14V or 28V, depending on the model number.
>
> These radios are available for not too much $$$ used.
>
> As an aside, I think your radio trouble is in the aircraft wiring or the
> radio's internal fuse.
> --
> Aaron Coolidge (N9376J)
>
Thanks! Do you know the value of the fuse?

Mike
MU-2

[Tom Cummings]

I found this on Eastern Avionics website: page
http://www.avionix.com/navcoms.html
You have to read about the 155 and 165 to determine what the 155A has!
The KX-155A has a VOR/Localizer converter board and digital radial feature
on the Nav side. It also has 32 programmable COM channels, remote channel
increment capability, stuck mike alert and shutdown, bearing TO and radial
FROM modes, internal VOR/LOC CDI Display elapsed timer, and full
backlighting of knobs and buttons..


Hope this helps.
Tom
"Aaron Coolidge" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Rapoport > wrote:
> : The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
> : dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to
do.
> : What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the
KX155A
> : and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching relay
to
> : allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to decide
what
> : to do.
>
> An additional point: ALL the 'A' suffix units are 28V only. The others may
be
> either 14V or 28V, depending on the model number.
>
> These radios are available for not too much $$$ used.
>
> As an aside, I think your radio trouble is in the aircraft wiring or the
> radio's internal fuse.
> --
> Aaron Coolidge (N9376J)
>

[Allen]

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Aaron Coolidge" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Mike Rapoport > wrote:
> > : The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten
the
> > : dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to
> do.
> > : What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the
> KX155A
> > : and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching
relay
> to
> > : allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to decide
> what
> > : to do.
> >
> > An additional point: ALL the 'A' suffix units are 28V only. The others
may
> be
> > either 14V or 28V, depending on the model number.
> >
> > These radios are available for not too much $$$ used.
> >
> > As an aside, I think your radio trouble is in the aircraft wiring or the
> > radio's internal fuse.
> > --
> > Aaron Coolidge (N9376J)
> >
> Thanks! Do you know the value of the fuse?
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>


I agree with Aaron, sounds like wiring problems. When you key the mike to
transmit it takes a lot more power. May be a bad ground? Is the Helio 28V
and the radios 14V (converter going bad)?

Allen

[Mike Rapoport]

"Allen" > wrote in message
om...
>
> "Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> >
> > "Aaron Coolidge" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Mike Rapoport > wrote:
> > > : The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten
> the
> > > : dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what
to
> > do.
> > > : What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the
> > KX155A
> > > : and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching
> relay
> > to
> > > : allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to
decide
> > what
> > > : to do.
> > >
> > > An additional point: ALL the 'A' suffix units are 28V only. The others
> may
> > be
> > > either 14V or 28V, depending on the model number.
> > >
> > > These radios are available for not too much $$$ used.
> > >
> > > As an aside, I think your radio trouble is in the aircraft wiring or
the
> > > radio's internal fuse.
> > > --
> > > Aaron Coolidge (N9376J)
> > >
> > Thanks! Do you know the value of the fuse?
> >
> > Mike
> > MU-2
> >
>
>
> I agree with Aaron, sounds like wiring problems. When you key the mike to
> transmit it takes a lot more power. May be a bad ground? Is the Helio
28V
> and the radios 14V (converter going bad)?
>
> Allen
>
>
It worked normally until one day when it totally failed, no display, no
radio, nothing. It could be outside the radio but I can't think of anything
that coincides with the failure. It is a 14V airplane with a 28V 155. I am
planning of getting a 14V radio and getting rid of the voltage converter. I
will probably get a 165 so that I can get rid of the VOR converter too.

Mike
MU-2

[Nathan Young]

On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 18:15:56 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> wrote:>>
>It worked normally until one day when it totally failed, no display, no
>radio, nothing. It could be outside the radio but I can't think of anything
>that coincides with the failure. It is a 14V airplane with a 28V 155. I am
>planning of getting a 14V radio and getting rid of the voltage converter. I
>will probably get a 165 so that I can get rid of the VOR converter too.
>

What OBS are you driving? If it's a 208/209 they have the VOR/LOC
converter integrated, so you don't need the 165.

[Aaron Coolidge]

Mike Rapoport > wrote:

:> As an aside, I think your radio trouble is in the aircraft wiring or the
:> radio's internal fuse.
:> --
:> Aaron Coolidge (N9376J)
:>
: Thanks! Do you know the value of the fuse?

There are 2 fuses, one for the display high voltage and one for the rest.
Their values are printed on them. You need to take the radio out & take the
cover off to get at them. I think they're under the top cover. Remember which
holes the screws come out of, they're several different lengths.
--
Aaron Coolidge (N9376J)

[Ben Jackson]

In article >,
Mike Rapoport > wrote:
>It worked normally until one day when it totally failed, no display, no
>radio, nothing. It could be outside the radio but I can't think of anything
>that coincides with the failure. It is a 14V airplane with a 28V 155.

Did you test the voltage converter?

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Mike Rapoport]

It is a 206 indicator so it needs a converter to work with a 155 or a 165
without a converter.

I've pretty much decided to go with the following

GMA340 Audio panel (integrated intercom allows getting rid of PS engineering
intercom/CD unit)
GNS 530 (gets rid of MD 441 switch/annunciator box and I am intimately
familiar with it (big plus IMO))
SL30 (can drive existing indicator w/o converter and allows getting rid of
14/28 voltage converter)
Retain existing KT76A transponder

The 530 will drive the HSI and the SL30 will drive the 206 indicator with no
switching between the two. The whole setup is .8" shorter, weighs 2lb less
and has about half the wires connecting everything. It provides a large
color screen with weather and terrain capability and WAAS upgradability.

Mike
MU-2





"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 18:15:56 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> > wrote:>>
> >It worked normally until one day when it totally failed, no display, no
> >radio, nothing. It could be outside the radio but I can't think of
anything
> >that coincides with the failure. It is a 14V airplane with a 28V 155. I
am
> >planning of getting a 14V radio and getting rid of the voltage converter.
I
> >will probably get a 165 so that I can get rid of the VOR converter too.
> >
>
> What OBS are you driving? If it's a 208/209 they have the VOR/LOC
> converter integrated, so you don't need the 165.

[Mike Rapoport]

Excellent point, I didn't but it is new.

Mike
MU-2

"Ben Jackson" > wrote in message
news:fHtZc.16956$_g7.9700@attbi_s52...
> In article >,
> Mike Rapoport > wrote:
> >It worked normally until one day when it totally failed, no display, no
> >radio, nothing. It could be outside the radio but I can't think of
anything
> >that coincides with the failure. It is a 14V airplane with a 28V 155.
>
> Did you test the voltage converter?
>
> --
> Ben Jackson
> >
> http://www.ben.com/

[O. Sami Saydjari]

I learned today that they do not make the KX-155A for 14 volt planes.
My installer said they could just pout a filter on the KX-155 radio to
prevent the interference with GPS. Does that make sense?

I am about to purchase a used KX-155/KI-209 Combo and have it installed.
I have a Garmin 430, so I want to make sure I am not going to run into
problems with my GPS.

-Sami
N2057M, Piper Turbo Arrow III

kage wrote:

> THE major difference between the KX-155/165 and KX-155A/165A is this:
>
> http://www.faa.gov/certification/aircraft/av-info/dst/8400-11.doc
>
> >>> 3. Harmonic interference (12th and 13th harmonic) from VHF
> transmissions on 121.150, 121.175, 121.200, 131.250, 131.275, and 131.300
> MHz has been observed to adversely affect reception of the GPS signal. Low
> pass or notch filters (with an insertion loss of 2 Db or less or the
> aircraft VHF COM radio must be re-certified) installed at the output of the
> VHF transmitter to attenuate the undesired harmonic signal, or modification
> of the VHF transmitter to improve internal harmonic attenuation, may be
> required. Shorted stubs, of appropriate lengths, could also possibly
> provide effective filtering and antenna matching." <<<<
>
>
>
> The straight 155/165 was designed long before GPS was ever envisioned, and
> are very noisy in 12th and 13th harmonics. Most IFR installations with these
> radios were made without regard to the interference, with the certifying
> pilot either ignorant or lying about the interference.
>
>
>
> The "A" model was designed to be free of these interferences.
>
>
>
> Other nice features are much better feeling rotary switches, with smoother,
> shorter and more precise clicks. Also, the 165A is available with 8.33 MHz
> spacing. The US may or may not go to 8.33 spacing, but since Europe already
> has the US will probably tow the line, like they did with METARS/TAF. Which
> brings up a funny point. I fly all over Europe regularly. IT is very
> uncommon to see a proper METAR/TAF report sequence. They report as they damn
> well please with any sequence that comes to mind at the moment. To get a
> proper sequence you need to fly in the US.
>
>
>
> So much for the vaulted "commonality" that was forced down our throats!
>
>
>
> Karl
>
>
>
>
>
> "Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>>The KX155 in my "new" airplane (Helio Courier) seems to have bitten the
>>dust. It looks like an old POS and I am trying to figure out what to do.
>>What are the functional differences between the KX155, KX165 and the
>>KX155A
>>and KX165A? The airplane has a Garmin 300XL as #1 and a switching relay
>>to
>>allow the 300XL or the KX155 to drive the HSI. I am trying to decide what
>>to do.
>>
>>My options are:
>>
>>A:
>>#1 Garmin 430
>>#2 KX155
>>Get rid of the "GPS/NAV" switch/annunciator box
>>
>>B:
>>Same as A but with 530. Pricey, but I could just buy the tray and
>>connectors and shuttle the 530 in my MU-2 back and forth until Garmin has
>>WAAS and then buy a 530A for the MU-2. This has the advantage of
>>presumably
>>saving the cost of the WAAS upgrade thereby reducing the 530 premium
>>somewhat.
>>
>>C:
>>#1 Currently installed 300XL.
>>#2 KX 155 or 165 I would prefer the 165 since I can get rid of the
>>converter
>>box that drives the HSI.
>>Keep the GPS/NAV switch/annunciator box
>>
>>The advantage of going with a 430 or 530 is that I have flown them for
>>800+
>>hrs and am comfortable with the operating logic. I can't say the same
>>about
>>the 300X:L.
>>
>>Cost is an issue. This is a second airplane and I anticipate using it 95%
>>VFR. I would rather spend the money on floats or skis :-). Since the
>>airplane may be left unattended in the backcountry for days at a time, I
>>would also like avionics that are not very attractive to a thief.
>>
>>What do you think?
>>
>>Mike
>>MU-2
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

[Dave Butler]

O. Sami Saydjari wrote:
> I learned today that they do not make the KX-155A for 14 volt planes. My
> installer said they could just pout a filter on the KX-155 radio to
> prevent the interference with GPS. Does that make sense?
>
> I am about to purchase a used KX-155/KI-209 Combo and have it installed.
> I have a Garmin 430, so I want to make sure I am not going to run into
> problems with my GPS.

Hi Sami,

I must have missed the posting to which you are replying, so I don't have the
context. I can say, however, that the KX-155 in my airplane certainly does
interfere with my handheld Garmin 196. Tuning the NAV side to either the FAY or
GSO VOR means a "lost satellite reception" message on the GPS. Perhaps a
certified GPS is less susceptible to interference.

If you installed radio first and then the GPS, the GPS would be tested for
interference during the installation, or at least that's how it used to be, I
think they've relaxed some of the installation requirements. It might be
worthwhile to ask the shop to do the interference test as if they were
installing the GPS.

Dave

[Javier Henderson]

Dave Butler > writes:


> I must have missed the posting to which you are replying, so I don't
> have the context. I can say, however, that the KX-155 in my airplane
> certainly does interfere with my handheld Garmin 196. Tuning the NAV
> side to either the FAY or GSO VOR means a "lost satellite reception"
> message on the GPS. Perhaps a certified GPS is less susceptible to
> interference.

What frequencies do those VOR's have? I don't recognize them (I'm in
central California).

I'd like to repeat that test in my plane, I have a GNS430 and a portable
GPS196 that I carry as a backup.

-jav

[Dave Butler]

Javier Henderson wrote:
> Dave Butler > writes:
>
>
>
>>I must have missed the posting to which you are replying, so I don't
>>have the context. I can say, however, that the KX-155 in my airplane
>>certainly does interfere with my handheld Garmin 196. Tuning the NAV
>>side to either the FAY or GSO VOR means a "lost satellite reception"
>>message on the GPS. Perhaps a certified GPS is less susceptible to
>>interference.
>
>
> What frequencies do those VOR's have? I don't recognize them (I'm in
> central California).
>
> I'd like to repeat that test in my plane, I have a GNS430 and a portable
> GPS196 that I carry as a backup.

Sorry, Jav, it annoys me when postings contain identifiers without any hint of
where they are, and now I'm guilty. Won't happen again.

FAY is Fayetteville, NC 180.80
GSO is Greensboro, NC 116.20

Dave

[Dave Butler]

> FAY is Fayetteville, NC 180.80
^^^^^^
108.80

[Frank Stutzman]

Dave Butler > wrote:
> O. Sami Saydjari wrote:
> > I am about to purchase a used KX-155/KI-209 Combo and have it installed.
> > I have a Garmin 430, so I want to make sure I am not going to run into
> > problems with my GPS.

> Hi Sami,

> I must have missed the posting to which you are replying, so I don't
> have the context. I can say, however, that the KX-155 in my airplane
> certainly does interfere with my handheld Garmin 196. Tuning the NAV
> side to either the FAY or GSO VOR means a "lost satellite reception"
> message on the GPS. Perhaps a certified GPS is less susceptible to
> interference.

I've got a KX-155, a Garmin 430 and a Garmin 195 (with external antenna)
on my plane. I've never noticed the problem you mention, Dave. Now it
could be that I never happened to tune my 155 to the frequencies you
mentioned. Since getting the 430, I rarely tune the 155 NAV to ANYTHING
;-). I also can't say that the 195 hasn't been affected as I don't tend
to kept a constant eye on it.


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

[Dan Thompson]

Another data point. I have had KX-155s working next to GPSs in several
different configurations for years with no problems. Currently a 530 and a
single 155 with GS.

"Frank Stutzman" > wrote in message
...
> Dave Butler > wrote:
>> O. Sami Saydjari wrote:
>> > I am about to purchase a used KX-155/KI-209 Combo and have it
>> > installed.
>> > I have a Garmin 430, so I want to make sure I am not going to run into
>> > problems with my GPS.
>
>> Hi Sami,
>
>> I must have missed the posting to which you are replying, so I don't
>> have the context. I can say, however, that the KX-155 in my airplane
>> certainly does interfere with my handheld Garmin 196. Tuning the NAV
>> side to either the FAY or GSO VOR means a "lost satellite reception"
>> message on the GPS. Perhaps a certified GPS is less susceptible to
>> interference.
>
> I've got a KX-155, a Garmin 430 and a Garmin 195 (with external antenna)
> on my plane. I've never noticed the problem you mention, Dave. Now it
> could be that I never happened to tune my 155 to the frequencies you
> mentioned. Since getting the 430, I rarely tune the 155 NAV to ANYTHING
> ;-). I also can't say that the 195 hasn't been affected as I don't tend
> to kept a constant eye on it.
>
>
> --
> Frank Stutzman
> Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
> Hood River, OR
>

[kage]

That might be true.

But your installation will NEVER pass the required IFR certification tests
required buy the FAA.

Karl


"Dan Thompson" > wrote in message
m...
> Another data point. I have had KX-155s working next to GPSs in several
> different configurations for years with no problems. Currently a 530 and a
> single 155 with GS.
>
> "Frank Stutzman" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Dave Butler > wrote:
>>> O. Sami Saydjari wrote:
>>> > I am about to purchase a used KX-155/KI-209 Combo and have it
>>> > installed.
>>> > I have a Garmin 430, so I want to make sure I am not going to run
>>> > into
>>> > problems with my GPS.
>>
>>> Hi Sami,
>>
>>> I must have missed the posting to which you are replying, so I don't
>>> have the context. I can say, however, that the KX-155 in my airplane
>>> certainly does interfere with my handheld Garmin 196. Tuning the NAV
>>> side to either the FAY or GSO VOR means a "lost satellite reception"
>>> message on the GPS. Perhaps a certified GPS is less susceptible to
>>> interference.
>>
>> I've got a KX-155, a Garmin 430 and a Garmin 195 (with external antenna)
>> on my plane. I've never noticed the problem you mention, Dave. Now it
>> could be that I never happened to tune my 155 to the frequencies you
>> mentioned. Since getting the 430, I rarely tune the 155 NAV to ANYTHING
>> ;-). I also can't say that the 195 hasn't been affected as I don't tend
>> to kept a constant eye on it.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Frank Stutzman
>> Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
>> Hood River, OR
>>
>
>

[Aaron Coolidge]

kage > wrote:
: That might be true.

: But your installation will NEVER pass the required IFR certification tests
: required buy the FAA.

: Karl

I have a pair of KX155 (not kx155a) and a Northstar M3. It passed the
interference tests as required by the FAA. I will check and see if any notch
filters were installed, but I do not believe there are any.

--
Aaron Coolidge

[kage]

Aaron,

The certification test requires that the GPS stay active when the microphone
is keyed on the following frequencies:

121.150
121.175
121.200
131.250
131.275
131.300

I don't know anything about an M3, but all the Garmin models have a page
that shows the satellite acquisition strength.

After you acquire the satellites, go to that page and select the above
frequencies on the KX-155. Now key the mike and transmit for about 10
seconds. The GPS is not allowed to lose it's acquisition.

If yours continues to function normally, congratulations! I've never seen a
KX-155 that will do that, with or without notch filters. In fact, King had a
white paper on the mods necessary to clean up the KX-155. The process went
far beyond adding "notch filters." Noise comes out the front, back, top and
bottom of the unit. I doubt anyone ever modified their straight 155 with
regard to King's recommendations.

Thus, the KX-155A was designed, and co-exists with GPS right out of the box.
Plus these units have many new features and design improvements.

Try the test on your ramp. Let me know!

Best,
Karl


"Aaron Coolidge" > wrote in message
...
> kage > wrote:
> : That might be true.
>
> : But your installation will NEVER pass the required IFR certification
> tests
> : required buy the FAA.
>
> : Karl
>
> I have a pair of KX155 (not kx155a) and a Northstar M3. It passed the
> interference tests as required by the FAA. I will check and see if any
> notch
> filters were installed, but I do not believe there are any.
>
> --
> Aaron Coolidge