• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Need advice on upgrading to ILS capability

Tom3holer

Tom3holer

MEMBER
Cape Cod
Hi,
I have a 73 185 that I would like to upgrade to ILS capability.
It currently has a Garmin 250 gps/comm and a newer Garmin comm and xponder.
There is no nav capability other than the older Garmin 250 with an outdated database.
I am a Ipad with Foreflight fan and use it all the time however I do need to upgrade to have ILS capability for those days that the wx goes down and I need to shoot an approach.
My thoughts are something like a KX155 and an indicator and 3 light MB indicator. There may be better options and would appreciate any thoughts.
Tom
 
Last edited:
Tom, if you really only want ILS I guess you could do that, I find myself almost never using ILS since the GPS approaches are so good. The old Garmin 430W is hard to beat and can be bought used.

sj
 
If you use a Garmin 430W or one of the newer Garmin "Do All" radios, you'll never want to go back to a KX 155 or same. As Steve says, the RNAV/GPS approaches out there now far outnumber the ILS approaches, and many of them now are precision, ie: They'll take you down to 250 feet and a half mile. So, you'll have a LOT more choices of places to go if in need of an approach.

Also, the way these boxes sequence the approach for you by cycling through the phases of the approach is great. Since the box knows where you are, it can move from one segment of the approach to the next automatically. When you're busy, that can really help. And, there are a lot of other features in these boxes that are really nice.

They will cost more, but installation of this stuff and certification costs something as well, and it costs to install a 155 as well. If you're going there, I'd sure opt for one of the Garmin "magic boxes", either used or new.

Try to stay away from the early Garmin 430. It is not approved for precision approaches because it's not WAAS enabled. The 430 W is WAAS enabled, and is approved for all the approaches.

When I started flying these things, my first comment was "Holy smokes! Even I can fly IFR with one of these things!" Amazing.

MTV
 
I might argue (imagine that) the choice of the 430w.

They are not supported by Garmin now. Neither is the 155. Just bite the bullet and get a new GPS/Com, take out the old out dated one and be done with it.

We pay to play. The reasons to go with the new are many, and above spells out the biggest: options.
 
You can buy a used 420 and upgrade it to a 420W for about 3000. Garmin does repair and upgrade the 420 and 430. Just upgraded one last year. You can even find some good buys on a used 420W. A good WAAS enabled GPS nav unit will allow you to do LPV approaches down which will generally be close if not equal to ILS minimums. I have a 420W, which means I don't and cannot navigate by VOR or ILS and I do just fine. Most the time, the LPV approach is a 50' higher minimum than the ILS. Close enough for me.
 
I would find a used KX 155 nav/com and a KX DME from a good source. If I was willing to spend money the new Garmin Nav/Com and a good handheld GPS for DME info (that would be legal for DME info and a good source of situational awareness). An ILS gives the best app. capability. Most other app. only get you a mile and that is really only a VFR transition. A good handheld GPS can be tossed in a few years when the new greatest comes out, and you still have a solid base navigation with the /NAV capability.

I think sometimes people need need to understand the basics of IFR and plan accordingly/equip.
 
Disagree, the difference between an ILS and an LPV is 50' and 1/4 of a mile. Doubtful you will ever need those margins to get in.
 
Mike, where does the FAA say you can use a handheld GPS for DME? A panel mount GPS I understand but a hand held? News to me.

In any case, there are thousands of LPV approaches in the lower 48 now, many many more than ILS.

MTV
 
I find the Ipad with Foreflight of FlyQ meets all may needs for now and into the future most of the time. There may be occasions where I will need to shoot an instrument approach to get back home and did not want to spend the money on a Garmin and find it outdated several years down the road. The ipad/tablet format will always be up to date including ADS B, I believe, although not certified.
I need to talk with a avionics shop and see what available. Not in a rush but it would be nice to have app capabilities without spending 6-8k.
 
Wish all you want but it won't lower the cost of avionics. And if you want an item that won't lose support in a couple of years, then you pay even more.

As for functionality, i would still recommend a 430 as minimum. Nothing wrong with a KX 155 (rock solid design) but if you need a little 'extra', a unit with com, VOR/GS, and primary certified GPS can't be beat. And the only difference between the straight 430 and a 430W is that the latter has a WAAS enabled GPS unit. If you absolutely need a WAAS unit get the 430W. If not, save a couple of thousand and get a straight 430. Lots of audio panels come with marker beacon lights built in. Depending on the model you have installed, you might be able to swap yours out with something similar for minimal cost.

The new Garmin 650's are their updated versions of the 430. While Garmin has stopped production of the 430, some support should be available for a few more years. And Jeppesen makes the data bases for them. If you dislike Garmin customer service as much as I do, Honeywell and Avidyne make units similar to the Garmin units.

As far as I know, there are no hand held or portable nav or GPS units that are 'legal'. Not saying they don't work well, just not ok'd by the feds.

Web
 
Well, and it is a big well. A DME does not need to be TSO'd, and this is where the stretch comes in but the FAA has opened Pandora's box with a policy letter and response to I believe Val Avionics that ends up making a convincing position. And for non-commercial applications that can be argued to include IPads. I will ask the DPE who showed this to me and get the reference. I do not think this is what the FAA meant but it is what is they did.
Mike

Edit Val Avionics does have a blurp in their product descriptions. I will ask the DPE how the chain of thought goes however. I am still confused as to the FARs on this. MTV knows the DPE I speak of.
 
Last edited:
I think MTV's first post (post #3 in this thread) is right on the money. The Garmin 430 can display three waypoints of an approach, which is super handy for keeping track of where you are. Combine it with an iPad app that includes geo-referencing and you'll have terrific situational awareness. [Or combine it with a much more expensive display like an MX20 or a GNC (i think) 200.].

Most of our planes have two 430s, and I usually put the CDI display on the top unit and the flight plan on the lower unit. The 430's CDI is orders of magnitude better than the HSI for lateral guidance. Plus, you can configure the display to show Desired Track, Track, and Crosstrack Error, and using them, you can really fly an accurate approach.

What I don't understand is why the 430s and 530s don't display the altitude for the leg you are on (it's on the approach plate, so why not show it on the display, too?) and why they don't display vertical guidance (like a vertical CDI). There must be something I don't know about how GPSs work . . . But if I'm not mistaken, the Capstone II system does show the altitudes, so it can be done.
 
ILS typically 200 and 1/2 or 2400 RVR depending on lighting available, GPS LPV mins 200 and 1/2 also depending on airport lighting. Anything below 1 mile really is dependent on the runway environment and lighting at the runway. RNP approaches not included in the above.

It should be noted the FAA does not consider a LPV approach to be a precision approach, it is classified as a precision like approach, no really this is in the 8900. So there are thre approaches, non-precision, precision-like, and precision. For a check ride requiring a demonstration of a precision approach you came do an ILS, PAR, or a LPV to simulate a precision approach portion of the check.
 
Last edited:
Tom, Walk across the field and talk to Jim Griffin. He has a rack with lot's of used avionics along with the people to help with any installation you wish.
 
mghallen said:
Well, and it is a big well. A DME does not need to be TSO'd, and this is where the stretch comes in but the FAA has opened Pandora's box with a policy letter and response to I believe Val Avionics that ends up making a convincing position. And for non-commercial applications that can be argued to include IPads. I will ask the DPE who showed this to me and get the reference. I do not think this is what the FAA meant but it is what is they did.
Mike

Edit Val Avionics does have a blurp in their product descriptions. I will ask the DPE how the chain of thought goes however. I am still confused as to the FARs on this. MTV knows the DPE I speak of.
Click to expand...

Mike,

Heres the verbiage from the AIM:

IFR Use of GPS
(a) General Requirements. Authorization
to conduct any GPS operation under IFR requires:
(1) GPS navigation equipment used for IFR
operations must be approved in accordance with the
requirements specified in Technical Standard Order
(TSO) TSO−C129(), TSO−C196(), TSO−C145(), or
TSO−C146(), and the installation must be done in
accordance with Advisory Circular AC 20−138(),
Airworthiness Approval of Positioning and Naviga-
tion Systems. Equipment approved in accordance
with TSO−C115a does not meet the requirements of
TSO−C129. Visual flight rules (VFR) and hand−held
GPS systems are not authorized for IFR navigation,
instrument approaches, or as a principal instrument
flight reference.
(2) Aircraft using un-augmented G

Seems pretty clear to me, and this was cited by our assigned fed at the U. When I asked the question of him.

MTV
 
If all you're looking for is the ability to shoot an ILS, VAL Avionics makes the INS 429.
Includes VOR localizer glideslope & marker beacon receivers- all in one unit.
$2K for the box, install price?

http://www.valavionics.com/ins-429.html

Narco used to make a similar non-digital stand-alone nav unit including GS &MKB,
can't recall the number (112, 122,?). Probably available used, but since Narco is defunct buying one might not be a good idea
since the support isn't there.
 
mghallen said:
This refers to GPS/RNAV navigation however. We are talking about shooting an ILS.
Click to expand...

The interpretation my fed offered was that if you are using GPS to locate any required component of an approach, then this: "Authorization
to conduct any GPS operation under IFR requires:" implies that you are in fact using GPS as part of your required equipment.

Methinks your guy is splitting hairs, and they're pretty fine hairs.....

MTV
 
I would trade my dual KX 155s, DME and marker beacons for a Garmin GPS Com of supportable type. Got one ILS and one VOR head with them...

I would do that in a heartbeat

Just saying!
 
I'm far, far from expert on this, but . . . I think that DME and marker are not required to conduct an ILS approach, but maybe there are exceptions? If they aren't required, then they only provide extra situational awareness. Physically, only the ILS needles, heading indicator, and altimeter are required. Similarly, if the portable device is only for extra situational awareness, it would not be used for a "GPS operation". Is this close to correct?
 
Gordon Misch said:
I'm far, far from expert on this, but . . . I think that DME and marker are not required to conduct an ILS approach, but maybe there are exceptions? If they aren't required, then they only provide extra situational awareness. Physically, only the ILS needles, heading indicator, and altimeter are required. Similarly, if the portable device is only for extra situational awareness, it would not be used for a "GPS operation". Is this close to correct?
Click to expand...

Many ILS's require DME or VOR or ADF to fly the approach or it's missed approach procedure. This is indicated on the individual chart when applicable, and AC90-108 specifies the requirements for using RNAV (including GPS) equipment as either an alternate means of identification or as a substitute for the NAVAID..
 
Gordon.

You have to be able to determine your position when established on the localizer. If DME is required, it will be stated on the plate. Marker beacons are seldom required. DME has effectively replaced them.

Gordon Misch said:
I'm far, far from expert on this, but . . . I think that DME and marker are not required to conduct an ILS approach, but maybe there are exceptions? If they aren't required, then they only provide extra situational awareness. Physically, only the ILS needles, heading indicator, and altimeter are required. Similarly, if the portable device is only for extra situational awareness, it would not be used for a "GPS operation". Is this close to correct?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Close - some procedures require a DME. Others will allow a radar fix.

You know, I had the same desire as Tom. I stuck a KN-53 King and KI-208 in the Super D, and have been delighted. I am not much for the 430; I want simple when single pilot IFR. My hard IFR days are over, but I find a simple setup, with a VFR portable GPS, the best for me.

Like Tom, I do have experience with glass cockpits. In the original versions of EFIS, I could force a 737-300 to sit up and talk. I have flown the Cirrus. I was an Airbus expert. But now what I want is simple stuff. Tune it, identify it, and slide right down there to minimums. Six times every six months, with a hold somewhere. And two of those are no gyro approaches.
 
Again thank you all for the input. it has been very informative.
I don't foresee myself doing many instrument approaches in actual conditions, but do want the ability to get in if the wx conditions necessitate.
There are many more GPS approaches and the ability to do one would be helpful.
I checked with a local Avionics shop across the field about what they might suggest for my situation. One thought was to replace my Garmin SL40 comm with a SL30 Nav/Com with glideslope.
They seem to be available used for under $3,000. After I sell my SL40 for $700ish it may cost me 3K with a used indicator plus installation.
One nice thing about the SL30 is that it has the ability to monitor 2 nav freq at the same time. One for the ILS on the CDI and one for a VOR radial on the Sl30 display so as to locate position on many ILS approaches.
The 430 was discussed but they did not suggest it as the cost was artificially high because so many commuters use them he said.

Tom
 
Well I called a very reputable avionics shop nearby in RI and talked with one of the techs about what I wanted to do.
He suggested that I steer clear of the 155 because they do not make the display anymore and if it went bad I could be SOL.
He did like the idea of the SL30 as its a drop in replacement for the currently installed SL40. It would require wiring for the nav side but uses the same tray.
Found one on Ebay with only 30hrs of use and a 8103 tag from this month for a very fair price. I will still need a head and am leaning toward a KI209A so be able to use it in the future If I upgrade to a WAAS gps unit.
Tom
 
So, what's your plan for position in IFR if you only have an SL30 and a non-ifr gps? You going to install a used DME too?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ruffair
ADS-B Mandate preparation / IFR GPS... View from my perspective
2
Replies
39
Views
17K
Ruffair
Ruffair
S
Barnstorm 2021: A Supercub Flying Adventure Across America
Replies
1
Views
1K
mam90
M
D
Barnstorming 2021
Replies
1
Views
2K
JP
JP
Back
Top