[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Your all going to have a real rough time with your ILS approaches with just a
GPS.  You better plan on at least one VOR with GS and a marker beacon
receiver.  If your plane turns out to be too light then you can always add an
ADF as ballast.  An IFR approved approach GPS is expensive and it will take
some time for the ILS system to go away so you better plan on it being around
for a good long time.


Matt Harrop wrote:

> My XL kit is on a truck as I type, so I'm probably a year away from
> actually deciding on the instrument and avionics complement for aircraft.
> Here are some of my ideas.
> Many people have mentioned standby vacuum as essential for IFR operation.
> While I agree with the reasoning, I think the conclusion is somewhat
> flawed.  Since the fact is that if you lose your AI in IMC you will
> probably die, I plan to install an electric AI as a backup to the vacuum
> driven instruments.  Having a vacuum gyro and an electric gyro means that a
> single failure can't take them both out.  True paranoia might actually lean
> towards a separate backup battery for the electric AI, to account for
> simultaneous vacuum and electrical failures.
> For avionics, a Garmin GNS430 will form the core of the system.  I'm not
> yet decided between a GPS/COMM or a NAV/COMM to backup the big Garmin.  I
> like the King KX-125 because it's fairly cheap, and has a built in OBS/CDI
> which will save an instrument hole.  On the other hand, something like a
> GNC250XL isn't much more expensive than the King, and in the event that the
> GNS430 goes south, I'd probably rather have a GPS than a VOR.  Having two
> GPS on the panel obligates me to maintain two data subscriptions, which
> isn't something I'd like to do.
> Any thoughts on either of these issues would be appreciated.
> Regards,
> matt


// James F. Agnew
// Tampa, FL
// Velocity 173 FG Elite ( http://www.VelocityAircraft.com/ ) under