Dammit MTV, why couldn't you just say "cave man." You and Z are always making me look words up, but I'm not such a Troglodyte that I use a paper dictionary.

Thanks fly. I was concerned you'd interpret my question in a negative way and that is not is how I meant it.

Whee,

No worries. I think you can fly single pilot IFR in just about anything. It just requires a higher level of proficency when the plane is less stable.

I just pulled a bunch of instruments and a complete vacuum system out of one of my planes for a glass upgrade. Shoot me a PM if your interested in a good deal on steam gauges.

fly wrote:I just pulled a bunch of instruments and a complete vacuum system out of one of my planes for a glass upgrade. Shoot me a PM if your interested in a good deal on steam gauges.

Thanks for the offer but I've got a while before I'm ready to buy instruments.

whee wrote:

CamTom12 wrote:Whee, I know you're looking for a shampoo-simple panel but I don't know how well your forever-plane will handle airspace in the future.

Who knows what the future airspace will bring us but if glass and waas gps are going to be required to fly in class E and non towered fields then I'm not sure I'll want to continue flying anyways.

Touché.

However, we run an HSI off the GPS in older Army aircraft. That would get you the look you're going for as well as functionality to fly RNAV approaches as well as enroute capability.

+1 on never wanting a vacuum pump in my aircraft. I'm a noob and I've seen these things fail repeatedly in the planes I rented (ifr certified).

I'll also point out that dynon also supports vor comm radio inputs - so if your gps fails - you would do what you would do with your steam gauges - switch to your backup or declare an emergency.

We're all sitting around guessing what will happen in the next 5 years - I'm no different - but I think that there will be better options than what you see today in 2020.

I think you are on the right track to delay panel design and as many of these decisions as long as you can.

NineThreeKilo wrote:

mtv wrote:If you are going to plan to fly IFR, do it right. What does that mean? One WAAS enabled GPS. Forget VOR/ADF/ILS/Marker Beacon Receivers, etc.

That's far from doing it right.
If you have a GPS outage (which happens) you're screwed, then what? you need to find a ASR or PAR?

I wouldnt take a plane equipped with only GPS into actual, also you'd have no capability to shoot a percision approach.

First, I don't think Mike was referencing a GPS-only box. A 430W or 650 provides GPS + VOR/LOC/ILS + comm. That takes care of what happens if there's a GPS outage. But in addition, as I said earlier, LPV approaches are every bit as precision as an ILS, and they will undoubtedly replace ILSs in the future--they are flown exactly the way an ILS is flown. Although I agree that relying totally on satellite based navigation right now is unwise, there will come a time when that's all that will be available (other than 20/20 eyeballs). TOFs like Mike and me won't be flying then, but young whipper snappers like Whee certainly will be, and at that point, there won't be GPS outages unless they have backups available, because that would ground everyone in the IFR system, including the airliners.

In any event, it makes sense to wait to decide until there's a gen-yoo-wine Whee-built Bearhawk capable of sustained flight before deciding on the avionics package, right?

Cary

A Dynon panel and a Garmin 430 it likely the cheapest way to create a usable IFR platform. The Dynon is cheaper than a 6 pack with a vacuum system. And much more capable. The 430 gets you a Com radio and a Vor receiver. Price out all the parts, I think you will come to the same conclusion. To be current you need 6 approaches every 6 months. That will cost a lot more than the data base. You don't need a autopilot to fly IFR but would be nice.

Cary wrote:In any event, it makes sense to wait to decide until there's a gen-yoo-wine Whee-built Bearhawk capable of sustained flight before deciding on the avionics package, right?

Yep, my reasoning for asking now is to plan the layout of the panel. Don't want to plan and install a VFR panel only to rip it out a short time later because it isn't workable for IFR equipment.

Thanks for the thoughts everyone. I get it, I need glass and a 430W if I want to survive in IMC...just like I need 31" Bushwheels to fly the Idaho backcountry

I honestly appreciate everyone's opinion and that is why I asked.

Dynon rocks! Got it in the SQ-2. Got the SV-D700 SkyView.

Wish I could put it in the 185.

BTW whee, they have a SkyView autopilot as well should you decide you want one.

Dynon rocks!

whee wrote:

As far as an autopilot being "required" to fly Single pilot IFR in a Bearhawk... I'd suggest some additional training to anyone who believes hand flying a 120 knot family plane in the clouds is too challenging.

Do you have Bearhawk time Fly? If you do then this statement means something and is an outlier. Every Bearhawk pilot I have talked to says pretty much the same thing; auto pilot is a extremely good idea if you want to do real IFR in the Bearhawk.

Totally agree.
Single pilot IFR without autopilot would be something else.
At aft CG you can't let her go for more than a few seconds, even changing maps usually means a minor pitch change, before you correct it. The controls are so light and well balanced, it's great fun in VMC.
In "simulated" turbulent IMC you cannot take your hand off the stick and eyes off the screen (Dynon ) for even a couple of seconds. Not impossible of course, just high workload and not much fun, compared to if the plane had AP to hold itself steady.

I should mention, of the many people in NZ building Bearhawk's, one guy is working toward IFR certification.

NineThreeKilo wrote:

mtv wrote:If you are going to plan to fly IFR, do it right. What does that mean? One WAAS enabled GPS. Forget VOR/ADF/ILS/Marker Beacon Receivers, etc.

That's far from doing it right.
If you have a GPS outage (which happens) you're screwed, then what? you need to find a ASR or PAR?

I wouldnt take a plane equipped with only GPS into actual, also you'd have no capability to shoot a percision approach.

Well, maybe you wouldn't, but a hell of a lot of folks are these days. GPS outages???? I spent seven YEARS teaching at a university flight training program....all with IFR GPS equipped airplanes. We did have a few GPS "Outages", meaning WAAS outages, but they were all short in duration, as in VERY short, and most were forecast.

And, since when can you not perform precision approaches with WAAS enabled GPS???? Maybe you need to take a look at the regs. With WAAS enabled GPS, there are lots of precision approaches out there, in fact, there are more precision GPS approaches out there now than there are ILS approaches.

For occasional IFR, WAAS enabled GPS is the only way to go. For serious IFR, two WAAS enabled GPS is probably the way to go......

As others have noted, look around at the charts....not that many ILS approaches out there these days, but there are hundreds and hundreds of precision GPS approaches.

MTV

What do you guys think of this?

ASI. ALT Room for
T&B D100

So I'll start with basic VFR instruments with the addition of a T&B w/skid ball. I'll leave room for something like a D100 which can act as a AI and a HSI at the same time. Does a HSI replace both a DG and a CDI w/GS? I'll start with just a comm radio, Icom A-210, but have room for whatever GPS/NAV,COM makes sense when the time comes, maybe a refurb 430W. The D100 can be slaved to both the GPS and a NAV radio.

An HSI (horizontal situation indicator) is the predecessor to a moving map. It essentially combines a DG, a CDI, and includes the GS indicator, as you surmised. Many are slaved to a magnetic compass so that they don't need adjusting periodically to account for precession, although there are non-slaved versions. Of course, electronic versions such as Aspen and Dynon have don't precess, anyway, as they use the AHRS to maintain heading.

Do you "need" an HSI? Not really. When I upgraded my panel with the 430W, I inquired about it, because I've flown with HSIs in a couple of airplanes for maybe a total of 100 hours or so, and they really are nice--scanning is easier. But for the extra $2500 it was going to cost me for a mechanical version, compared to the amount of actual IFR I could anticipate flying, I can do just fine with a separate DG and CDI.

Cary

Whee,

That seems like a smart way to go. I'd recommend a modular 3 piece panel (left, radios, right) That way you don't need to Build the whole thing again when you add or change equipment.

I'm not sure what you have in mind for an engine monitor but the D-180 is basically a D-100 with an integral engine monitor. It would be the most economical way to go. The D-180 can be configured to display the HSI page when required for navigation. If you want a separate engine monitor (and plan to use Dynon glass), I'd recommend you buy a Dynon EMS. The Dynon legacy "D" series products (except for the original D-10 EFIS) all network so either display can display data from either box. The "legacy" Dynon stuff is coming up for sale quite frequently with the RV crowd as it's not compatable with the SkyView systems most are upgrading to.

As an example, here's a photo of the parts I put together for the panel upgrade I'm working on. I'm using a D-100 networked with a D-10 EMS and a used Garmin 695. I've got a GTR -200 com radio (only thing purchased new) also tied to the 695 and a GTX-327 transponder. Total investment for everything in the photo $5,200. While this may not be exactly what you have in mind for your airplane, I think it's a good example of what can be put together at a reasonable price if you don't need the absolute latest whiz bang stuff.



Sent from my iPad

I was just looking over the Dynon stuff again and crap, it just makes sense even if I don't like it.

I was thinking of going with a D10 to monitor the engine but I just read about the DSAB connectivity. Makes sense to put a D100 EFIS on the left and a D120 EMS on the right then all info is available on either screen.

I know I know...y'all told me so... We'll see what happens with the time comes.

Ya, I really pike the dynon stuff as well. If the 180 sells and I build a Tundra, its getting dynon glass. I sure wish I could run it in the 180...

A1Skinner wrote:Ya, I really pike the dynon stuff as well.

Never said I liked, it just makes too much sense to deny.

whee wrote:

A1Skinner wrote:Ya, I really pike the dynon stuff as well.

Never said I liked, it just makes too much sense to deny.

Haha. Apparently I don't likrle it either. Need to proof read before hitting submit. I agree with you, the steam panels look great, but the lightweight and utility just makes it very hard to deny!

whee wrote:I was just looking over the Dynon stuff again and crap, it just makes sense even if I don't like it.

I was thinking of going with a D10 to monitor the engine but I just read about the DSAB connectivity. Makes sense to put a D100 EFIS on the left and a D120 EMS on the right then all info is available on either screen.

I know I know...y'all told me so... We'll see what happens with the time comes.

Yeah - it happens