Panel mount IFR GPS for training ...

[Bud_of_yours]

Last weekend I bought an IFR equiped '68 Cherokee 140 to get my
Instrument ticket in ... ( I flew it from Bedford, MA home to
Savannah, GA in one day. But, that is another story. )

The guy that I'm going to use as my CFII came out and looked the plane
over and told me that while the plane is technically IFR equiped it
still needs a few things. ( Isn't that typical??)

The plane is equiped with a KMA-24 audio panel with markers, KX-155
w/KI-209 nav/comm with glide slope, KX-125 nav/comm, and a KT-76
transponder. I also had pitot heat installed during the prepurchase
annual/inspection.

According to my instructor I can get my instrument ticket in the plane
as equiped, however in order to be a more well rounded instrument pilot
I really need to add an IFR certified GPS to my panel.

Question #1. In order to get my Instrument ticket tucked safely in my
pocket do I really need to be concerned about learning GPS approches,
etc.?

Question #2. If I do decide to add a GPS to my panel what is the
best/least expensive way to do it. GNS 155XL? KLN-94?

I don't plan on keeping this plane forever. And I don't want to invest
a ton of $$$ in it.

Any comments, suggestions, experiences would be appreciated.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Bud_of_yours" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Last weekend I bought an IFR equiped '68 Cherokee 140 to get my
> Instrument ticket in ... ( I flew it from Bedford, MA home to
> Savannah, GA in one day. But, that is another story. )
>
> The guy that I'm going to use as my CFII came out and looked the plane
> over and told me that while the plane is technically IFR equiped it
> still needs a few things. ( Isn't that typical??)
>
> The plane is equiped with a KMA-24 audio panel with markers, KX-155
> w/KI-209 nav/comm with glide slope, KX-125 nav/comm, and a KT-76
> transponder. I also had pitot heat installed during the prepurchase
> annual/inspection.
>
> According to my instructor I can get my instrument ticket in the plane
> as equiped, however in order to be a more well rounded instrument pilot
> I really need to add an IFR certified GPS to my panel.
>
> Question #1. In order to get my Instrument ticket tucked safely in my
> pocket do I really need to be concerned about learning GPS approches,
> etc.?
>
> Question #2. If I do decide to add a GPS to my panel what is the
> best/least expensive way to do it. GNS 155XL? KLN-94?
>
> I don't plan on keeping this plane forever. And I don't want to invest
> a ton of $$$ in it.
>
> Any comments, suggestions, experiences would be appreciated.
>

Do you have to have a IFR GPS, no. But as years go by GPS is obviously going
to be more and more prevalent and GPS approaches are going to open up many
more airports for IFR operations. If I were you I'd by a used 155XL and get
it installed.

Here's one just in time for christmas
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=004&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=140064668019&rd=1,1

[John[_1_]]

( I flew it from Bedford, MA home to Savannah, GA in one day. But,
that is another story. )


I would like to hear (read) that story.

Blue skies

John

[ktbr]

Bud_of_yours wrote:
>
> Question #1. In order to get my Instrument ticket tucked safely in my
> pocket do I really need to be concerned about learning GPS approches,
> etc.?

Yes, you do need to learn about GPS navigation and the associated
instrument approaches. But no, you do not need to have one in your
airplane to train for anf get your IFR ticket. If you don't though,
you should consider renting one that does in order to get some
instruction and practice in GPS approaches.

After you've had most of your basic IFR training you could most
likely become competent with IFR GPS with an additional 10 hours.
At $100/hr that's a good chunk toward buying one for you plane
so you might just want to consider doing it.

>
> Question #2. If I do decide to add a GPS to my panel what is the
> best/least expensive way to do it. GNS 155XL? KLN-94?
>
In my opinion, a GPS without WAAS capability to do the LPV and GLS
approaches isn't really any better than ground based approaches
you can do with your equipment (ILS, LOC, VOR) unless place you fly
out of (or places you go alot) only have GPS approaches. GPS does
offer good situational awareness beacuse of the map though, but you
can get that with a portable GPS... and even do practice non-
precision GPS approaches with them.

> I don't plan on keeping this plane forever. And I don't want to invest
> a ton of $$$ in it.
>
> Any comments, suggestions, experiences would be appreciated.
>
Any $$$ invested would probably only be half recovered when you
sell the plane, but a GPS would increase tghe value of it.

[Roy Smith]

"Bud_of_yours" > wrote:
> The plane is equiped with a KMA-24 audio panel with markers, KX-155
> w/KI-209 nav/comm with glide slope, KX-125 nav/comm, and a KT-76
> transponder. I also had pitot heat installed during the prepurchase
> annual/inspection.

That sounds like a limited, but pretty typical GA IFR panel up until GPS
came on the scene and changed everything. More typically, you would have
had an ADF too. The next step up would have added DME.

> According to my instructor I can get my instrument ticket in the plane
> as equiped, however in order to be a more well rounded instrument pilot
> I really need to add an IFR certified GPS to my panel.

I would agree with him for the most part, but that doesn't mean you need to
run out and buy a GPS today. IFR training is about several things:

1) Learning how to hold heading, altitude, and airspeed within carefully
controlled limits. You need to be so good at this that you can do it half
in your sleep. This has nothing to do with GPS.

2) Learning how to work in the system, i.e. interacting with ATC,
understanding clearances and procedures, knowing how to read the various
kinds of charts, maintaining situational awareness, etc. This has nothing
to do with GPS.

3) All kinds of regulatory stuff like alternates, minimums, currency
requirements, required equipment, etc. This has nothing to do with GPS.

4) Knowing how to use specific navigation technologies. This is where GPS
finally comes into the picture. With the equipment you have now, you will
get a good basic foundation in the use of VOR navigation, which is still
going to be useful to you. Certainly, you will be spending plenty of time
practicing ILS approaches, which aren't going away any time soon.

> Question #1. In order to get my Instrument ticket tucked safely in my
> pocket do I really need to be concerned about learning GPS approches,
> etc.?

Absolutely not. Get the rating with the equipment you have now and learn
the basics. At some point in the future, you will undoubtedly want to move
up the GPS, but there's no reason you have to do it now.

> Question #2. If I do decide to add a GPS to my panel what is the
> best/least expensive way to do it. GNS 155XL? KLN-94?

"Best" and "least expensive" really don't belong in the same sentence :-)
A quick look at ebay shows lots of used previous-generation IFR panel-mount
GPS's going for $1-2k. Add to that installation costs and the cost of
maintaining a database subscription (another few $100/year). But, if, as
you say:

> I don't plan on keeping this plane forever. And I don't want to invest
> a ton of $$$ in it.

It may not be worth it. Adding something like that to the plane won't add
much, if anything, to the resale value.

At the "best" end of the spectrum, adding a high-end unit like a
GNS-430/480/530 will be more in the $10k range. But, first get the basic
rating and use it a bit. Then you'll have a better understanding of what
the issues are and what you needs are.

[john smith]

No, you do not need an IFR GPS to get your instrument rating.
Roy makes valid points.
I would add that you would actually be better off with GPS while you do
your training.
My reasoning is that it will teach you to think about where you are in
the 3-D world instead of showing you. You will have to think to
interpret your instruments and convert them to a point in space based
solely on how the NAV needles are moving.
Once you can do that, then add the GPS.

[Mike Adams[_2_]]

john smith > wrote:

> I would add that you would actually be better off with GPS while you do your training.


I assume John meant "without GPS". I would agree - the situational awareness the map provides is
great, but it is a bit of a crutch - figuring it out based on the separate traditional instruments is good
practice.

One other point not mentioned: If you go ahead and get the GPS now, you will be expected to be
proficient in its use on your checkride. If you wait until later, you can decide what your needs are and then
learn to use whatever you buy on your own schedule. I went this route - on my checkride I did an NDB,
ILS and VOR approach. Then added a GPS later. I've often thought it would have been a mixed blessing -
I would have had to really learn the GPS to be ready for the checkride, but OTOH flying the GPS
approaches with the map is very easy compared to an NDB approach. (and I suppose learning that NDB
technique when the ADF isn't even in my panel anymore was somewhat of a wasted effort at this point.)

Mike

[Doug[_1_]]

A GPS will probably just complicate getting your IFR ticket. Suggest
you start without it, talk to your instructor and look at what other
pilots in your area are doing. Also, talk to your DE. Yes an IFR GPS
is a great instrument to have, but it's actually easier to learn on
traditional instruments.

[Robert M. Gary]

Doug wrote:
> A GPS will probably just complicate getting your IFR ticket. Suggest
> you start without it, talk to your instructor and look at what other
> pilots in your area are doing. Also, talk to your DE. Yes an IFR GPS
> is a great instrument to have, but it's actually easier to learn on
> traditional instruments.

I teach in G1000 aircraft as well as some pre-GPS aircraft. I disagree
with your statement. Doing a PT for an ILS with a moving map is much
easier than trying to figure entry procedures.

-Robert, CFII

[BT]

(and I suppose learning that NDB
> technique when the ADF isn't even in my panel anymore was somewhat of a
> wasted effort at this point.)
>
> Mike

Note a wasted effort at all, you can apply what you learned about NDB and
course corrections to all aspects of your IFR flying.

BT

[pgbnh]

Find a new instructor.

Learn the 'system' first - airways, navigation, flight control, approaches,
power settings. Get IFR ticket WITHOUT the GPS. Then once you are pretty
good without the GPS, add it later as a bonus. If you learn to rely on the
GPS, then you are in trouble when you lose it. It the GPS is an ADDITIONAL
instrument, and you learn how to use it, then youi will be a more complete
IFR pilot
"Bud_of_yours" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Last weekend I bought an IFR equiped '68 Cherokee 140 to get my
> Instrument ticket in ... ( I flew it from Bedford, MA home to
> Savannah, GA in one day. But, that is another story. )
>
> The guy that I'm going to use as my CFII came out and looked the plane
> over and told me that while the plane is technically IFR equiped it
> still needs a few things. ( Isn't that typical??)
>
> The plane is equiped with a KMA-24 audio panel with markers, KX-155
> w/KI-209 nav/comm with glide slope, KX-125 nav/comm, and a KT-76
> transponder. I also had pitot heat installed during the prepurchase
> annual/inspection.
>
> According to my instructor I can get my instrument ticket in the plane
> as equiped, however in order to be a more well rounded instrument pilot
> I really need to add an IFR certified GPS to my panel.
>
> Question #1. In order to get my Instrument ticket tucked safely in my
> pocket do I really need to be concerned about learning GPS approches,
> etc.?
>
> Question #2. If I do decide to add a GPS to my panel what is the
> best/least expensive way to do it. GNS 155XL? KLN-94?
>
> I don't plan on keeping this plane forever. And I don't want to invest
> a ton of $$$ in it.
>
> Any comments, suggestions, experiences would be appreciated.
>

[Jose[_1_]]

> I would add that you would actually be better off with GPS while you do
> your training.

I think you meant (and the rest of your post supports) "without" the GPS.

Jose
--
"There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows
what they are." - (mike).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Robert M. Gary]

pgbnh wrote:
> Find a new instructor.
>
> Learn the 'system' first - airways, navigation, flight control, approaches,
> power settings. Get IFR ticket WITHOUT the GPS.

Probably should skip VORs and NDBs too, stay away from that fancy new
stuff and just stick with good old radio ranges.

-robert

[john smith]

In article . com>,
"Robert M. Gary" > wrote:

> Doug wrote:
> > A GPS will probably just complicate getting your IFR ticket. Suggest
> > you start without it, talk to your instructor and look at what other
> > pilots in your area are doing. Also, talk to your DE. Yes an IFR GPS
> > is a great instrument to have, but it's actually easier to learn on
> > traditional instruments.
>
> I teach in G1000 aircraft as well as some pre-GPS aircraft. I disagree
> with your statement. Doing a PT for an ILS with a moving map is much
> easier than trying to figure entry procedures.

That's just the point, Robert.
The student must first mentally learn the process and concept.
Unless they own their own moving map GPS equipped aircraft, they may not
always have access so such an equipped aircraft if they rent.
The moving map helps one refine their procedures once they comprehend
and understand the concepts. The student has to first learn to fly the
needles before flying a picture.

[Marco Leon]

OK, I'm going to have to break from the pack here. I think you should
get the GPS installed for the following reasons:

1) It WILL increase the resale value of the aircraft. Of course not as
much as the upgrade price but more than adding another NAV/COM. Don't
take my word for it. Browse the ads on ASO and Trade-A-Plane and
compare for yourself.
2) GPS is the wave of the future and is arguably the current state of
the art. There is no question if it may or may not "catch on" it HAS
and is here to stay. If you follow the other posters' lines of thought,
you should just mark the glideslope inop and get your ticket using just
the LOC and VOR approaches. But why learn ILS approaches? Because
they're the standard precision approach types and they're very common.
The same rationale should apply to GPS technology.
3) In my opinion, GPS approaches are much simpler than other
non-precision approaches because the non-overlay ones (as in standard
T-types) are pretty much the same no matter the airport. Learning them
will be at worst no more difficult than the myriad of VOR approaches
out there. That said, there are other aspects (i.e. enroute and
regulatory) that you need to be up to speed on if you head to the
examiner with a "slant Golf" on your flight plan. Still simple stuff
IMO.
4) It WILL make you a better pilot with more tools under your belt. If
you're going to learn them anyway why wait till afterward when you are
more likely to learn it in a half-assed way.
5) Could be a safety move. Picture going missed and having all the
airports with only GPS approaches available to you. Could take some of
the pucker factor out.

I can't believe it was suggested you get another instructor. Why,
because he has the opinion that you should know more than know less??

As for which IFR GPS to install, get quotes from various shops for the
everything needed to get the aircraft IFR certified. Many of the older
units need some extra things such as annunciators that can quickly add
to the price. Also, don't be so quick to write-off a Garmin 430. I did
initially until I priced everything out and realized that to get the
same capabilities in the 430, it would cost more with USED equipment.

All you need to get your instrument rating is one NAV/COM and a
transponder (I believe even only and ADF instead of the NAV/COM) if all
your interested in is the ticket.

Marco



Bud_of_yours wrote:
> Last weekend I bought an IFR equiped '68 Cherokee 140 to get my
> Instrument ticket in ... ( I flew it from Bedford, MA home to
> Savannah, GA in one day. But, that is another story. )
>
> The guy that I'm going to use as my CFII came out and looked the plane
> over and told me that while the plane is technically IFR equiped it
> still needs a few things. ( Isn't that typical??)
>
> The plane is equiped with a KMA-24 audio panel with markers, KX-155
> w/KI-209 nav/comm with glide slope, KX-125 nav/comm, and a KT-76
> transponder. I also had pitot heat installed during the prepurchase
> annual/inspection.
>
> According to my instructor I can get my instrument ticket in the plane
> as equiped, however in order to be a more well rounded instrument pilot
> I really need to add an IFR certified GPS to my panel.
>
> Question #1. In order to get my Instrument ticket tucked safely in my
> pocket do I really need to be concerned about learning GPS approches,
> etc.?
>
> Question #2. If I do decide to add a GPS to my panel what is the
> best/least expensive way to do it. GNS 155XL? KLN-94?
>
> I don't plan on keeping this plane forever. And I don't want to invest
> a ton of $$$ in it.
>
> Any comments, suggestions, experiences would be appreciated.

[Mxsmanic]

Robert M. Gary writes:

> I teach in G1000 aircraft as well as some pre-GPS aircraft. I disagree
> with your statement. Doing a PT for an ILS with a moving map is much
> easier than trying to figure entry procedures.

Until the G1000 reboots, that is.

Besides, not all aircraft have G1000s installed, fortunately.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mxsmanic]

Robert M. Gary writes:

> Probably should skip VORs and NDBs too, stay away from that fancy new
> stuff and just stick with good old radio ranges.

Learn to use what you know you will have. Then learn to use what you
are likely to have. Then learn to use what you'd like to have.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Dave S]

Bud_of_yours wrote:
..
>
> Question #1. In order to get my Instrument ticket tucked safely in my
> pocket do I really need to be concerned about learning GPS approches,
> etc.?

If its in the plane, you have to be able to complete an approach with
it. To get your ticket you need to do 2 non precision approaches and a
precision approach. An ILS, a VOR and a LOC approach will pass the
muster on the checkride. You dont HAVE to have a GPS in the plane to get
, nor maintain an instrument rating. So your instructor is right.

That being said, you really need to do your homework and learn about the
GPS (er.. RNAV) approaches, because they are becoming more and more
widespread, while there is an active effort to decommission land based
approaches based on say.. ADF's.. If used properly you can also use the
GPS features for situational awareness while flying a land based
approaches. So again, in my opinion, your instructor is right, again.

>
> Question #2. If I do decide to add a GPS to my panel what is the
> best/least expensive way to do it. GNS 155XL? KLN-94?

A used KLN 89B can be had for less than $1000 (I have bought 2..).. same
for an older KLN-90B. Expect another AMU to get it all installed with
what it needs.. more if your CDI's aren't compatible. Based on what you
listed, it may not be (the KI-109A IS, however, but thats $$$) It would
be wise to sit down with an avionics guy of good repute, and use that as
a jumping off point.

Based on what you have listed installed, expect to either 1) buy a 2nd
CDI (GPS only, or share it with your KX-125 if you like)... 2) replace
the KI-109 with a KI-109A (AND a switching relay to switch between
showing GPS and the ILS on the CDI- pretty much a must if you share a
CDI between a GPS and a NAV) 3) also you will need to have an
annunciator display installed in the primary scan area that indicates
when passing waypoints, when an approach is active, and shows when an
approach is armed versus active.. 4) you will also need to have your
encoder tied to the GPS, or a second encoder installed, which is tied to
the GPS to give altitude data to the GPS for IFR approaches. These
tidbits are specific to the older GPS's, not the newer, more expensive
WAAS capable ones. Again, it would be wise to sit down with an avionics
guy of good repute, and use that as a jumping off point.

The early Kings (89B and 90B) arent the most capable, snazziest units,
but they get the job done. I've shot approaches on them before in
actual, and felt comfortable with the unit (but had spent MUCH time
getting used to it/comfortable with it). The moving map is small, but
still is better than NO moving map.

If you decide to upgrade, the KLN-94 has the color screen and is a
direct drop in replacement (same tray) as the KLN-89B. Some features may
require a little ADDED wiring, but if the back of the rack is
accessible, this is trivial - not much more than a few more D-sub pins
pushed into a 25 or 37 pin connector - compared to an initial install.


Good Luck
Dave

My background on this: Non-A&P, Homebuilder, installed a KLN 89B,
KX-125's, Terra Tri-Nav CDI's in an under construction Velocity, with a
goal on making it IFR capable /G. Have the install manuals on the KX-125
and KLN-89B.

[Roy Smith]

Mxsmanic > wrote:

> Besides, not all aircraft have G1000s installed, fortunately.

This is the real crux of the matter with the new stuff. In the old days, I
could jump into pretty much any airplane equipped with VOR receivers and
figure out how to use them. There just wasn't that much functionality, so
the UIs were all pretty much the same.

With modern GPS, glass panel, etc, it's a whole new story. I've spent a
lot of time over the past few years showing people how the CNX-80 (GNS-480)
works. Basic proficiency take 10 flight hours spread out over 4-6 flights,
and that assumes the student puts in some effort to study the manuals
between flights. I would expect another 10 hours of practice on their own
before they launched into any serious IMC.

And, once they have mastered that, they have learned how to fly ONE model
of GPS. If they move to another unit, some of the knowledge will cary
over, but a lot of it will be starting from scratch.

[Mxsmanic]

Roy Smith writes:

> This is the real crux of the matter with the new stuff. In the old days, I
> could jump into pretty much any airplane equipped with VOR receivers and
> figure out how to use them. There just wasn't that much functionality, so
> the UIs were all pretty much the same.
>
> With modern GPS, glass panel, etc, it's a whole new story. I've spent a
> lot of time over the past few years showing people how the CNX-80 (GNS-480)
> works. Basic proficiency take 10 flight hours spread out over 4-6 flights,
> and that assumes the student puts in some effort to study the manuals
> between flights. I would expect another 10 hours of practice on their own
> before they launched into any serious IMC.
>
> And, once they have mastered that, they have learned how to fly ONE model
> of GPS. If they move to another unit, some of the knowledge will cary
> over, but a lot of it will be starting from scratch.

Have you noticed what all these fancy stuff is starting to resemble?
It's starting to look just like ... the world of computers. That's no
a coincidence, but it's a severe turn for the worse.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Roy Smith]

In article >,
Mxsmanic > wrote:

> Roy Smith writes:
>
> > This is the real crux of the matter with the new stuff. In the old days, I
> > could jump into pretty much any airplane equipped with VOR receivers and
> > figure out how to use them. There just wasn't that much functionality, so
> > the UIs were all pretty much the same.
> >
> > With modern GPS, glass panel, etc, it's a whole new story. I've spent a
> > lot of time over the past few years showing people how the CNX-80 (GNS-480)
> > works. Basic proficiency take 10 flight hours spread out over 4-6 flights,
> > and that assumes the student puts in some effort to study the manuals
> > between flights. I would expect another 10 hours of practice on their own
> > before they launched into any serious IMC.
> >
> > And, once they have mastered that, they have learned how to fly ONE model
> > of GPS. If they move to another unit, some of the knowledge will cary
> > over, but a lot of it will be starting from scratch.
>
> Have you noticed what all these fancy stuff is starting to resemble?
> It's starting to look just like ... the world of computers. That's no
> a coincidence, but it's a severe turn for the worse.

The cockpit of the future is going to contain a pilot, a computer, and a
dog. The computer's job is to fly the plane. The pilot's job is to feed
the dog. The dog's job is to bite the pilot if he tries to touch anything.

[Mxsmanic]

Roy Smith writes:

> The cockpit of the future is going to contain a pilot, a computer, and a
> dog. The computer's job is to fly the plane. The pilot's job is to feed
> the dog. The dog's job is to bite the pilot if he tries to touch anything.

Maybe so. I know that the airlines dream of being able to dispense
with pilots. They'd like to get rid of flight attendants as well.
Ironically, the first wish will probably come true long before the
second. Eventually I suppose the lead flight attendant will simply
press a big "START" button that has replaced the cockpit when it's
time to begin a flight.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Ron Natalie]

ktbr wrote:

> In my opinion, a GPS without WAAS capability to do the LPV and GLS
> approaches isn't really any better than ground based approaches
> you can do with your equipment (ILS, LOC, VOR) unless place you fly
> out of (or places you go alot) only have GPS approaches.

Well a regular IFR GPS does let you get around some of the
DME/ADF required issues (since I believe he has neither of
those either).

[Ron Natalie]

Doug wrote:
> A GPS will probably just complicate getting your IFR ticket. Suggest
> you start without it, talk to your instructor and look at what other
> pilots in your area are doing. Also, talk to your DE. Yes an IFR GPS
> is a great instrument to have, but it's actually easier to learn on
> traditional instruments.
>
I think the moving map makes things A LOT EASIER for IFR. Given
a choice, I'd give up my autopilot long before you could have my
moving map. The key is to find an instructor who REALLY KNOWS
the GPS you have in your plane. We spent a good amount of ground
time "buttom mashing" the Garmin simulator before we ever attempted
to fly it.