m_moyle wrote:The empty hole is for the new Scandia multifunction back up instrument.

FYI... if your talking about the new Sandia SAI Quattro, there is even better news. They haven't changed the rhetoric yet, but the word at OSH was that when it is released this fall, it will be now certified as a primary instrument for the attitude, but will also do airspeed, altitude and slip.

I have one on order and the plan will be to dump the vac driven AH and put it right in the six pack. If I didnt have the S Tec autopilot, I could toss the entire vac pump etc...

Fingers crossed it goes as planed.

http://sandia.aero/product/sai-340-quattro/

Well after several months and a lot of help from an IA A&P type guy, I received a large envelope from Juneau FSDO that contains a signed and approved form 337 to install a Garmin G3X in my C170B.
To say I'm happy would be one of the biggest understatements of the year .

It will be a few months before I take on that project, but I will post before, during and after pic's.

Logpile wrote:Well after several months and a lot of help from an IA A&P type guy, I received a large envelope from Juneau FSDO that contains a signed and approved form 337 to install a Garmin G3X in my C170B.
To say I'm happy would be one of the biggest understatements of the year .

It will be a few months before I take on that project, but I will post before, during and after pic's.

Now, THAT should be waaaay cool! I like it. But don't tell anyone on the 170 forum......

MTV

Great news! Congrats! Can't wait to see what it looks like in the panel.

How much paperwork was it to get approved? Difficult process?

Bagarre wrote:Great news! Congrats! Can't wait to see what it looks like in the panel.

How much paperwork was it to get approved? Difficult process?

Because it was my first project with the FAA, it took about 4 months to get the paperwork just the way they wanted it. Now that I kinda have a template and relationship with the guys in Juneau, I think it will be quicker for my next project. Stay Tuned
Not too much paperwork, just a revised maint checklist, 337, referencing all of the related AC 43.13-1B chapters/sections, and a few supporting documents that are specific to the G3X.
Cessna put this same package (G3X single display with Opt dual display) in the 162, and I bought a copy of the parts and repair/maint manual for MORE supporting information complete with Cessna P/Ns if needed.
As it turned out it was not needed, but I have it just in case.

I've been interested in installing one of the new-fangled small EFIS's in my airplane for quite a while-- the new Garmin G5, Dynon, GRT, etc. There's been quite a few discussions about doing that and what it takes for approval. More than one IA has put forth the opinion is that it's no big deal for an early, CAR-3 certified airplane- at least if it's for VFR flight:

1) does it meet the definition of a major alteration per the FAR's? (no)
2) are you removing any instruments required by FAR or TCDS? (no)
3) is there a requirement in CAR 3 that says instruments must be TSO'd? (no)

I've had a couple A&P's tell me they would sign off installation of a G5 or similar as a logbook-entry-only minor alteration, no problem. I think I might have to label it "for vfr use only" but that's no biggie. I'm inclined to go for it, just haven't decided which one and ponied my money up yet.

Logpile, is the Garmin G3X installation you did approved & certified for IFR use?

The G3X is not IFR approved, and so far has only been approved in LSA aircraft, until this thread, at least .

I've flown a "Skycatcher" Cessna 162, with that instrument system, and I loved it. Lots of information, easy to read, great presentation.

EAA has recently petitioned the FAA to permit installations of non TSO EFIS in TCd aircraft. The door is open a crack. I hope it opens much wider soon. These things are nothing but a positive for older airplanes, in my opinion.

But, a minor? Good luck getting it past the FAA. We did this on several aircraft in Alaska, based on guidance from the MRL FSDO. Then the Region got involved and shut that door.

Glad to hear they're opening that door again.

MTV

Logpile wrote:

Bagarre wrote:Great news! Congrats! Can't wait to see what it looks like in the panel.

How much paperwork was it to get approved? Difficult process?

Because it was my first project with the FAA, it took about 4 months to get the paperwork just the way they wanted it. Now that I kinda have a template and relationship with the guys in Juneau, I think it will be quicker for my next project. Stay Tuned
Not too much paperwork, just a revised maint checklist, 337, referencing all of the related AC 43.13-1B chapters/sections, and a few supporting documents that are specific to the G3X.
Cessna put this same package (G3X single display with Opt dual display) in the 162, and I bought a copy of the parts and repair/maint manual for MORE supporting information complete with Cessna P/Ns if needed.
As it turned out it was not needed, but I have it just in case.

It seems that patience and having someone in the FAA willing to work with you is the key.
Finding that person can be tricky tho.

Had similar experience getting 175 wings approved for our 170. Everyone said it's impossible but I happened to find the right person at the right time who had done one in the past AND was willing to work with me. Two weeks later, I've got approved paperwork

The trickiest part was the GMA22 (Magnetometer) installation in the left wing. But I referenced the Garmin installation and the related AC 43.13-1B chapters/sections. After that is was no problem. But that does count as a major alteration, triggering the 337 rather that a logbook entry.

anybody still looking at this thread?
I also would like to put a G3X in my 175. Avionics shops all say no way!
I would not have to replace my original gauges, in fact I like the back up. I would install as a stand alone unit. best of both worlds so to speak.
In any case, a copy of a 337 would go a long way in making this happen as a precedent perhaps, at least some ammo to help the process.
any body still "out there" on this topic?

Dunno about the G3X, but lots have people have installed a Garmin G5 in their certificated airplane. Either the second, STC'd version, or the original ( as a minor). I did the latter, under the guidance of a Sept 2015 FAA policy statement.

http://download.aopa.org/advocacy/PS-AC ... 1490493789

Here's an AOPA article about this:

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... ors-easier

There's been at least one thread about this here on BCP, if not several.

I'm admittedly dumb on certified aircraft things, so pardon my ignorance on this:

If all your TCDS required instruments remain in the panel, why would any approval at all be required to add something like the G3X? Is a 337 required to panel mount an iPad/796?

CamTom12 wrote:I'm admittedly dumb on certified aircraft things, so pardon my ignorance on this:

If all your TCDS required instruments remain in the panel, why would any approval at all be required to add something like the G3X? Is a 337 required to panel mount an iPad/796?

Cam, First, you have to understand that you're dealing with the FAA, so please don't look for logic here. You will find opinions all over the place on whether instruments in CAR 3 airplanes (or FAR 23 airplanes for that matter) have to be TSO'd, STC'd or blessed by the Holy Father.

An example: A number of years ago, our maintenance shop went to the Merrill Field FSDO, and proposed installing the small Dynon EFIS in the panel of VFR only airplanes, Cubs and Huskys (so both CAR 3 and FAR 23). The FSDO avionics guy said no sweat, as long as all required equipment remained, and with a placard on the Dynon which said "Not for primary Information". None of these planes were IFR equipped, and none were equipped with vacuum systems or attitude gyros.

After a few of these installations were done, the Anchorage Regional Office of the FAA found out about this, and informed us that all these installations had to be removed, because they weren't TSO'd instruments. Long story short, our maintenance chief politely told the Region to stuff it, since these were "public aircraft".

But, that's how weird this whole deal gets. CAR 3 does not specifically require TSO'd equipment, so many argue that instruments shouldn't have to be TSO'd. The FAA seems to just say that they're the FAA and therefore they have to be TSO'd.

As noted earlier, though, the EAA is making some headway in that realm, which is refreshing. I can certainly understand why some sort of approval might be good for an IFR device, but as an auxiliary for a VFR only airplane?

Progress is slow, but hopefully it'll continue. It's really exciting to me that the gent on here got the feds to accept a G3X in an old airplane.....that is a sweet instrument system.

MTV

I appreciate the reply Mike, the "not for primary information" thing is exactly along the lines of what I was thinking.

Looks like I'm definitely sticking to E-AB in the future. It makes no sense to me why you can't add something to a plane if all the originally required equipment is still there.

Logpile, is there any chance of sharing a copy of the G3X form 337? That would be an amazing modification to most of the planes on here. Also, were you able to get approval for it to act as a primary for all instruments, or just a back up? Thanks!

At the Minnesota Pilots show this spring, one of the avionics vendor had information on two new Dynon products: A VFR “All in one” unit with PFD with GPS NAV, a built in comm radio, an ADS-B in and out transponder, and engine info as an option, all on a 7 inch screen. Ten inch screen optional. $10 K. An IFR package is also to be offered, for $20K. Not sure what all is in that one.

But, if starting from scratch, or remodeling totally, that’s not a bad price for all you get.

MTV

mtv wrote:At the Minnesota Pilots show this spring, one of the avionics vendor had information on two new Dynon products: A VFR “All in one” unit with PFD with GPS NAV, a built in comm radio, an ADS-B in and out transponder, and engine info as an option, all on a 7 inch screen. Ten inch screen optional. $10 K. An IFR package is also to be offered, for $20K. Not sure what all is in that one.

But, if starting from scratch, or remodeling totally, that’s not a bad price for all you get.

MTV

That's the Skyview I believe right Mike? I hope they get approved soon, hoping to go that route with my 206 since I have a blank panel currently...

A1Skinner wrote:

mtv wrote:At the Minnesota Pilots show this spring, one of the avionics vendor had information on two new Dynon products: A VFR “All in one” unit with PFD with GPS NAV, a built in comm radio, an ADS-B in and out transponder, and engine info as an option, all on a 7 inch screen. Ten inch screen optional. $10 K. An IFR package is also to be offered, for $20K. Not sure what all is in that one.

But, if starting from scratch, or remodeling totally, that’s not a bad price for all you get.

MTV

That's the Skyview I believe right Mike? I hope they get approved soon, hoping to go that route with my 206 since I have a blank panel currently...

Yes, I think that’s right. The displays looked really nice. I’ve heard folks with experience with both say they like the Dynon displays better than the Garmin displays.

Interesting option, in any case, and their intent is to certificate it, or at least STC it in various Aircraft.

MTV

I love the idea of the skyview. When I win the lottery someday and build my bearhawk, the skyview was by far my favorite panel choice. If I can get a single screen into the Cessna 140, if be very happy

The SkyView HDX system is approved for a 172F and higher to include the autopilot. $2k for the STC and PMAd equipment is the same price as their experimental line....which is incredible IMO.

They are working on other aircraft now like a twin and a higher performance type.
After that they will circle back to adding aircraft to the AML.

The folks at Dynon are are great people and working hard to get more planes approved. I’m holding off on buying anything as I hope to have a path to a 10” HDX in my 170 early next year.

These are exciting times to have an old and outdated panel.