PDA

View Full Version : Radio/transponder suggestions



Kiwisupercub
10-16-2008, 03:17 PM
Thanks for the suggestion on the Becker, they would fit in the wing root OK, but are pretty expensive to buy and to fit.

I was looking at a Microaire combo, does anyone have experience with them. I hear mixed reports, more bad than good?

What do other cubs have in a standard cabin/instrument panels setting that is tried and tested.
I am not that set on having something small or top of the line, more I really want advice on a good standard set up that fits well and works.
I guess the bottom line for me is I want some thing that is robust and won't want to smash my knee caps if I have to put her down in a place I don't want to be...

Doesn't have to be new, I would settle for good (complete) second hand.
Cheers and thanks......

Roger Peterson
10-16-2008, 03:31 PM
Had the Microaire in the plane for 5 years and no problems. Would buy again.

Darrel Starr
10-16-2008, 06:19 PM
We are very satisfied with the arrangement pictured below in our Super Cub. The ICOM A200 Ver 100 TSO COM RADIO is clear and trouble free. It will pick up ATIS out 40 miles 1000ft above the airport. We had one in our Cessna 120 for at least 10 yrs (non-TSO) with no problems. We bought ours on eBay. If ICOM ever TSOs the A210 I would like to have one of those for the brighter display.
We were fortunate to get a friendly price on our BENDIX KING KT-76C TSO TRANSPONDER from a friend with a nearly new C206 who was upgrading to Mode S. It has a bright display, shows the altitude on the face and has a convenient to use set of buttons. The encoder also was nearly new, Trans-Cal S120-30A, purchased on eBay from a guy also upgrading.
We surface mounted the Garmin (296 was later replaced by a 496 -- purchased on eBay) because the next gen Garmin will be a different shape and I didn't want to mess with installing a different shape Air Gismo holder in the panel.
We also had a PS Engineering PM1000II in the Cessna for years without a problem and very clear performance. Got a bargain on this one at Oshkosh.
So we are happy campers with this setup and can recommend all of the individual pieces.
Darrel

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data//513/medium/PA300029_cropped.jpg

StewartB
10-16-2008, 06:24 PM
I'm a Becker fan. I don't understand the reference to fitting them in the wing root.

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data//500/medium/11-13-05_PA-12_first_flight_010.jpg

Darrel, Why is a TSO important to you?

SB

Darrel Starr
10-16-2008, 07:29 PM
Stewart,
As I understand it, the FAA requires that a certified aircraft must have TSOd radio gear. I think the primary concern is frequency discrimination. In fact when I purchased the non TSOd ICOM A200 for the Cessna 120, I called the MN FSDO. They told me a TSOd unit was required OR if the manufacturer would supply a written statement that the unit I had was identical to their TSOd unit, I could get a field approval for VFR flight. So I contacted ICOM and they emailed the required statement (the difference is the required paper trail for all parts in a TSOd unit). I then applied for and got a field approval to install it in the Cessna.
This time around I just purchased the ICOM A200 Ver 100 for a $100 premium to get the TSO and saved the field approval hassle.
Regards, Darrel

StewartB
10-16-2008, 07:36 PM
I thought TSO'd radios were only required for commercial ops. Radios aren't required equipment for private GA ops. Somebody here will straighten me out, no doubt.

Stewart

Kiwisupercub
10-16-2008, 10:20 PM
Keep your thoughts and suggestions coming... you are providing me with lots to think about. I really appreciate the photos and efforts you have gone to.

My cub is in its original 1957 production condition, the old lay out on the instrument panel doesn't allow me enough space to mount a radio, let alone a transponder on the panel the way it is.

I don't really want to change the original 51yr style of the a/c too much, as the rest of it is in original production condition.

Mounting the radio/transponder combo under the panel is still an option, mounting in the wing root panel (beside the old red pea fuel indicator) is where some a/c have them mounted in this part of the world. Not with standing it would have to be small and weather proofed.

Thank you again, your thoughts and help are appreciated.. Google ZK BKW and you should come up with some links to some photos of my old girl back in the 1960's. She hasn't changed much from then.

cubscout
10-16-2008, 10:29 PM
Beautiful Becker installation in the Pix above. Becker is a top choice for me, having flown them enough to like them.

Owned a Microaire, and now fly three others. Really don't care for them: When they're good they sound good on the air, but some trips back to the factory. And mainly the selector controls are very fiddly, knobs are small, difficult to manipulate in turbulance, and take too much pilot attention.

One brand I've seen advertised is Flighline, which is more like the Becker than the Microaire. Anyone got experience?

Excellent experience with Dittel and Filser com radios, but don't know if they make transponders.

Chat up your local sailplane community and their suppliers for local knowledge of any of the above. Currency exchange rates in your locale may be an issue, too.

Most of the above have short case lengths, so can fit where others may not, if structures behind the panel are close.

In flatpacks, either Garmin SL40 or any of the Icoms are good choices, but longer cases. King KY97A are also good, but more expensive than the Icoms.

The original post seemed to be thinking of mounting in wingroot. My own opinion is that this would be unhandy, and would require focusing attention to the side (which might lead to disorientation or vertigo), and would certainly take longer than just glancing down to change frequiencies or volume. Might be OK for transponder, but not for a com radio, at least for me.

Just my opinion, and worth much less than you paid for it.

Thanks. cubscout

tripleoption
10-17-2008, 12:22 AM
I thought TSO'd radios were only required for commercial ops.

Stewart
By coincidence, certified aircraft are also required for commercial ops. :)
My understanding is that a non-TSO'd, PMA'd or STC'd part is considered unapproved, and can only be deemed worthy by the FAA, through the 337 process. If it's TSO'd, no approval necessary. Naturally, all of the above applies to certified aircraft only, and of course, consult your local FSDO before writing the checks and cutting your panels to fit.

StewartB
10-17-2008, 12:30 AM
For consideration, thanks to Google.

http://edburkhead.com/Ercoupe/radio_tso_requirement.htm

SB

Fido
10-17-2008, 02:04 AM
Have 2 EA of those Becker xpdr's surplus, refer to Classified add's, please

Darrel Starr
10-17-2008, 10:18 PM
OK StewartB – You got me thinking. It had been about 4 years since I got a field approval for the non-TSOd ICOM A200 in our Cessna 120 so I called the MN FSDO again today to ask the same question.
I got a prompt and thoughtful response from one of the FSDO inspectors – he asked me not to use his name in this post.
The upshot is that for a non commercial VFR aircraft, the regulations regarding use of a non-TSOd com radio is “open to interpretation”. The person in charge of the alteration is the arbitrator – if he so chooses, he can approve the installation of a non-TSOd radio at his discretion. The problem is that the next IA at the next annual can then baulk at this decision and refuse to sign off the annual. Or if the aircraft is exported, the non-TSOd radio will stop the procedure until it is replaced by a TSOd unit. So the stance of the MN FSDO is that they STRONGLY prefer that a non-TSOd com radio be approved through a field approval.
The Inspector noted FAR 43.13a as follows:
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=564e0d5fb546182afdcd3f11f281bb77&rgn=div8&view=text&node=14:1.0.1.3.21.0.363.10&idno=14
§ 43.13 Performance rules (general).
(a) Each person performing maintenance, alteration, or preventive maintenance on an aircraft, engine, propeller, or appliance shall use the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the current manufacturer's maintenance manual or Instructions for Continued Airworthiness prepared by its manufacturer, or other methods, techniques, and practices acceptable to the Administrator, except as noted in §43.16. He shall use the tools, equipment, and test apparatus necessary to assure completion of the work in accordance with accepted industry practices. If special equipment or test apparatus is recommended by the manufacturer involved, he must use that equipment or apparatus or its equivalent acceptable to the Administrator.
The highlighted words can, according to the Inspector, mean that a radio must be TSOd – accepted industry practices.

Also mentioned as worthwhile guidance by the Inspector was:
1. AC20-62d (Eligibility, quality and identification of Aeronautical Replacement Parts)
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/e3f88e3493669cb0862569ae006d32ba/$FILE/ATT1EBDT/AC20-62D.pdf
2. AC 21-29c (Detecting and Reporting Suspected Unapproved Parts)
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/90796153bea02b43862574910056a9ca/$FILE/21-29C%20chg%201.pdf

So, there you have it – go ahead with a non-TSOd radio if your IA is willing but risk a reversal later if another IA baulks or if you want to export the aircraft. The Inspector clearly PREFERRED a field approval to cover a non-TSOd radio.
Regards, Darrel Starr

StewartB
10-17-2008, 10:29 PM
I think the Minnesota FSDO guys are wrong, plain and simple. To perform the work in accordance with accepted industry practices does not address the certification of a radio, it addresses the workmanship of the installation. It matters little to me since both my airplanes employ TSO'd radios. It has nothing to do with preferring a TSO, however.

I'd love to hear from some of the professionals about their thoughts on this topic.

Stewart

Darrel Starr
10-17-2008, 10:38 PM
StewartB -- since you disagree with the MN FSDO, how about calling your local FSDO and reporting their opinion? That would really be a useful addition to the discussion.
Darrel

StewartB
10-17-2008, 10:41 PM
I'll be happy to do that on Monday.

SB

tripleoption
10-18-2008, 01:36 PM
I agree with StewartB on the interpretation. All of the installs I've done so far have been new or used, TSO'd, and with paperwork, but I'm curious about this because the day will come. Next time my FSDO rep stops in, I'll have something to ask him.

Speaking of paperwork, how many Ebay radios/instruments come with it?

Darrel Starr
10-18-2008, 05:30 PM
Daryl,
I'm not sure what you mean by paperwork -- Installation instructions and wiring diagrams? There is a lot of that available on the Internet to be downloaded or can be mailed out by the manufacturer. Or did you have something else in mind?
Darrel

tripleoption
10-18-2008, 06:09 PM
Daryl,
I'm not sure what you mean by paperwork -- Installation instructions and wiring diagrams? There is a lot of that available on the Internet to be downloaded or can be mailed out by the manufacturer. Or did you have something else in mind?
Darrel
Sorry to confuse...Daryl was someone I knew and respected.
Paperwork, meaning 8130's, yellow tags, anything to show traceability. You know, the stuff you pay for that comes with a free airplane part in every box. Without paperwork, you have a useless trinket...well, useful for experimentals I guess. Someone has to prove it's airworthy, and some faceless character on Ebay isn't good enough.

Darrel Starr
10-18-2008, 07:33 PM
For something like a carburetor, a "return to service" tag would be important. I bought a lot of new & used instruments and a couple of new & used radios also over the years. I don't recall seeing any tags or anything else on radios or instruments that I would have saved as an important part of a VFR aircraft's paperwork. The serial number tag on the unit tells the story. If it works, it is good to go.
Darrel

StewartB
10-18-2008, 08:19 PM
That's because a radio isn't required equipment in your plane(s). That's the key to the whole discussion.

If you chose to fly with a hand-held, what happens to the TSO argument?

SB

bob turner
10-18-2008, 08:42 PM
All of those tags do not need to be retained forever. And in some circles, a new radio is not a major repair or alteration. My radios are all TSO, simply because that's the way they came. But if I were going to put an ICOM in there, I wouldn't hesitate to use the cheaper one. Most IAs miss the obvious - we had a major AD here that was missed by no fewer than 23 IAs, many of them at different certified repair stations. Think those guys would know the difference between a TSO and non-TSO ICOM? It isn't really obvious on the front of the box. Some IAs are still missing that Lyc oil pump stuff.

Steve Pierce
10-19-2008, 07:35 AM
Stewart, Nice find that sums it all up. My old time FAA inspector who is now retired agreed with what you posted. As long as the radio wasn't a required item it didn't need a TSO. Glad to see something written on this and Joe Norris is a great resource on these matters.I have installed non-TSO'd CHT/EGT gauges using the same argument. As far as traceability, I have a hanger full of bits and pieces that don't have any 8130 tags. It is up to the installer to verify eligibility.

aalexander
10-19-2008, 08:26 PM
I think that the folks at the Minneapolis FSDO and apparently a few others have completely lost perspective on the subject of TSO'd radios.

The King KX 170B Nav/COM is one of the most common (if not *the* most common) GA Nav Com radios. There are thousands out there. I would venture to say that very few among us have never flown a plane equipped with a KX170B. They are everywhere. And you know what?

They are not TSO'd!!!!!!!!!!

The KX 175, which is almost identical *is* TSO'd, but the KX170 is not.


Has anyone, anywhere, actually heard of an IA refusing to sign an annual because there was a KX170 installed in the plane?

Dead silence....

Yeah, right, because no IA is going to refuse to sign off an annual because an airplane has a kx170. In some places that would likely mean refusing to sign an annual on *most* of the airplanes that come into your shop.

YOu gotta wonder, If a radio has to be TSO'd to be installed in a certificated aircraft, why did King manufacture thousands of them? They weren't chasing the experimental market. So they were sellng them for expensive bookends???

In fact King (allied signal) still offers some of it's products in TSO and no TSO'd versions. And I can guarantee you that Allied Signal isn't doing it for the experimental market.

Darrel Starr
10-19-2008, 10:00 PM
Well, here is another confusion factor - here is an on-line store which I assume would know what their customers need to be legal -- look at their answer to a customer. I'd say call your local FSDO to be sure.
Darrel
http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data//510/medium/ICOM_IC-A210_--_Non-TSOd.jpg

Darrel Starr
10-19-2008, 10:14 PM
And here is another one that I found on the following web site -- I don't know who Michael is but he seems to have a plausible response to the KX-170B being legal vs other non-TSO radios. I just find this stuff to be interesting.
Darrel
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Rec/rec.aviation.owning/2006-04/msg00767.html

Are TSO Instruments required in certificated aircraft? Altimeter,
airspeed , anything.....

Not unless it's used in operations for hire (rentals and instruction
don't count).

The problem is, if they're not TSO'd, on what basis are you installing
them? To be installed as an aircraft part, whatever you are installing
must be a standard part (not applicable to instruments - we're talking
hardware, wire, etc.), a TSO'd part, a TC'd/STC'd part, a PMA'd part,
or a part manufactured by the owner-operator. Otherwise it's not an
aircraft part, and will require a field approval.

So let's say you want to install a non-TSO'd altimeter, radio, whatever
into your certificated airplane.

Sometimes it's easy. Let's say you want to install a KX-170B. It's
not TSO'd. But it's manufactured as an aircraft part, with FAA
authorization. No problem.

Or let's say it's a Magellan 5000 VFR GPS. It has (believe it or not)
a Beech PMA. No TSO, but no problem either. It's an aircraft part,
the installation is considered a minor alteration these days (at least
in some FSDO's), so no worries.

But what if it's not? What if the manufacturer has no authorization
from the FAA of any kind? Not going to happen. Can't install it. Not
unless you get an STC or field approval.

Michael

tripleoption
10-20-2008, 11:40 AM
It is up to the installer to verify eligibility.
That's exactly my point. My feeling is the more paperwork, the better. How many installers here run their Ebay purchases through the whole test listed in the radio manufacturer's manual? "Eligible" and "airworthy" are not the same in my mind. A dataplate and serial number alone are a good start, but not enough for me.

We all have our limits. I just like to err on the side of "CYA". Very few of my aircraft are VFR-only anyway, so maybe it's a moot point.

N3243A
11-26-2008, 12:23 AM
I think that the folks at the Minneapolis FSDO and apparently a few others have completely lost perspective on the subject of TSO'd radios.

The King KX 170B Nav/COM is one of the most common (if not *the* most common) GA Nav Com radios. There are thousands out there. I would venture to say that very few among us have never flown a plane equipped with a KX170B. They are everywhere. And you know what?

They are not TSO'd!!!!!!!!!!

The KX 175, which is almost identical *is* TSO'd, but the KX170 is not.


Has anyone, anywhere, actually heard of an IA refusing to sign an annual because there was a KX170 installed in the plane?

Dead silence....

Yeah, right, because no IA is going to refuse to sign off an annual because an airplane has a kx170. In some places that would likely mean refusing to sign an annual on *most* of the airplanes that come into your shop.

YOu gotta wonder, If a radio has to be TSO'd to be installed in a certificated aircraft, why did King manufacture thousands of them? They weren't chasing the experimental market. So they were sellng them for expensive bookends???

In fact King (allied signal) still offers some of it's products in TSO and no TSO'd versions. And I can guarantee you that Allied Signal isn't doing it for the experimental market.

This post is DEAD ON THE MONEY. Exactly what I was thinking. I think some of these FSDO guys need to retire or get a clue. I Just had an A&P (in Minnesota no less) install the new Icom IC-A210 NON TSO'd unit in my Comanche under a minor alteration. No problemo...