Panel Discussion: Cessna 180 Upgrades on Poor Webjanitor Budget

[stewartb]

What you see may not be structural but what lies right behind it is.

 

[Bart23Sept]

isn't that a later model panel? I don't see the interconnect crossing behind the panel and it looks like the center stack is already there

 

[RaisedByWolves]

Order a CGR-30 and bring your check book when you drop it off.
I have the panel file saved, you could probably put the 430 and audio panel or transponder where johns 530 is.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Paul Jackson]

Raised by Wolves:

Does your guy have a 180H panel(s) in his files? I am in the early stages of redo of my 1965 180H. I think I can get out of the vacuum business and I have some decent stuff to work with and some old junk to remove.

PJJ

 

[Dave Calkins]

1953 with the T column

center stack would fit a 430 above the column and a short #2 com or remote transceiver with control head below 430 and keep the EDM 900 at the bottom of center stack.

Lose the sixpack for dual G5's with ALT and ASI on the left

I did this panel with a 430 in mind for the future. with the nav head where the VSI is now. and a mini DG where the G meter is and a mini vsi "somewhere"

I would go G5 nowadays thinking

 

[aktango58]

Order a CGR-30 and bring your check book when you drop it off.
I have the panel file saved, you could probably put the 430 and audio panel or transponder where johns 530 is.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like Spend Money, and she flies very well! She is a great plane for what she does.

But with all due respect, knowing that the goal is for a couple, both pilots, to use the plane as their 'travel' machine, I would NOT consider spending $10k without going to a center stack.

Ask yourself why most every new aircraft is set up today with the avionics in the middle? Both seats can comfortably reach, manipulate, and program frequencies and flight plans, Pilot Not Flying can be in either seat working radios while the other person flies the plane. Why would you invest big money and the time into a layout that does not achieve that very simple but important principal, especially for a couple that are both pilots?

One other idea I would be seriously considering would be to develop the panel with the plan to install a G-5 or similar on the right side, so if you have someone in the right seat that can help or wants to fly in IFR, they can have all the information directly in front of them. That can be an investment down the line, but you might want to have that plan as you lay it out.

 

[texmex]

is the panel in a 180 considered a structural element?

No

Web

It's your profession Web, but for my own clarification, what do companies like the above I found on the net do. Are you paying for an STC'd panel or can I simply get the local sheet metal work expert to do the same?

I don't understand the whole STC'd expensive GPS thing. What does the Garmin 430 do that the Aera 660 won't?

I'm a round instrument type of guy and have had the above picture saved on my computer as something to aspire to.

Good luck SJ.

 

[Wingwrench]

Here's my 53 with U yoke 30 years ago. Loran is long gone, Mk12D smoked this year and replaced with a Ky196 I had on the shelf. Getting ready to start cutting aluminum again.

 

[aktango58]

View attachment 34741

It's your profession Web, but for my own clarification, what do companies like the above I found on the net do. Are you paying for an STC'd panel or can I simply get the local sheet metal work expert to do the same?

I don't understand the whole STC'd expensive GPS thing. What does the Garmin 430 do that the Aera 660 won't?

I'm a round instrument type of guy and have had the above picture saved on my computer as something to aspire to.

Good luck SJ.

430 certified IFR with capability to couple to AP for route and approach.

Next question?

 

[L18C-95]

I lease out a Warrior which has a second hand BK KLN94 that speaks to an STEC-20. It also has an old BK 155, and a Garmin 255 Nav/Com/ILS. Vacuum driven AI/DG. The KLN94 is a capable, reliable, unit and can be found for $1k or $2k. While only good for LNAV approaches, and no WAAS, it ticks most of the IFR boxes.

Even more basic is second hand Apollo GX60 units which are still IFR supported by Garmin. Some might be going free on old avionic shelves.


Sent from my iPad using SuperCub.Org

 

[wireweinie]

Sure it was a KY196? That's a 24V unit and the '53's were 12V aircraft. Typo or did you rig up some kind of power supply?

Web

Here's my 53 with U yoke 30 years ago. Loran is long gone, Mk12D smoked this year and replaced with a Ky196 I had on the shelf. Getting ready to start cutting aluminum again.

View attachment 34742View attachment 34743

 

[wireweinie]

Break it down into sections.

The vast majority of instrument panels are NOT structural. If you fly this airplane without the panel installed, it won't break. If the aircraft will break, then your panel IS structural. And no floating panels are structural items. Looking at SJ's panel as an example, it's simply a flat piece of aluminum. Cut it to shape. Mark the forward side of the panel to show where the 'no go' areas are, i.e. any place that you don't want to mount something. Then lay out where the mounting hardware will be installed and drill the holes for them. Now carefully lay out and cut for instruments, avionics, and all other items, such as switches, breakers, lights, etc. Keep checking that each new item fits properly to the panel AND into the aircraft. Keep in mind that if you mount square items such as radio trays, you'll need to allow room for the angles and any support brackets. And allow room for paint or powder coating! That portion of the project is a minor alteration and just needs a log book entry.

Now, any instruments or avionics may or may not be STC'd. If you replace a certified instrument with another like item (also certified) it's a simple log book entry. If you update instruments with something like Electronics International or JPI instruments, it will most likely have an STC on it. Not a big deal. Install it, the mechanic signs off the 337 and the log book, the IA inspects and signs off the 337 and its sent to Oklahoma City. Done.

Moving or replacing the smaller items such as the switches and panel lights are just log entries by the mechanic.

As for the STC'd or certified avionics vs non certified, George hit right with the 430 vs 660. The 660 is just a GPS. The 430 was 'certified' so they put it through a BUNCH more testing. And it has a metric ton more capabilities. You can legally and safely fly the GPS or the nav in full IFR. It will drive most primary navigation instruments available. It will also drive a secondary nav head, if you have need for one. It has vertical and horizontal outputs to couple to most auto pilots. And it has multiple data lines to allow it to be coupled to almost any combination of other instruments/items to make up a custom avionics system. Think about being able to upload a flight plan through a unit like a Flightstream. And if you have more than one 430, they can be coupled together to be uploaded simultaneously. You can input pressure altitude from a serial or Gray code altimeter or output GPS altitude to a unit such as a remote display. You can connect up to air/data computers. You can connect DME systems and RMI's. You can even use it, along with a UAT and transponder, to build an ADS-B system. I'm sure there's more that I'm not thinking of.

Web

View attachment 34741

It's your profession Web, but for my own clarification, what do companies like the above I found on the net do. Are you paying for an STC'd panel or can I simply get the local sheet metal work expert to do the same?

I don't understand the whole STC'd expensive GPS thing. What does the Garmin 430 do that the Aera 660 won't?

I'm a round instrument type of guy and have had the above picture saved on my computer as something to aspire to.

Good luck SJ.

 

[texmex]

430 certified IFR with capability to couple to AP for route and approach.

I understand that, but they both tell you the same thing except one has an approved sticker on it (read charge thousands more)
As per L18C-95's post, what's to stop you buying the cheapest legal IFR unit, putting it out of harms way to check that box and then putting a non certified say Dynon flat screen or even the Garmin Aera 660 on the prime real estate?

Next question?

So I can take the above photo along to my sheet metal work man and ask him to make that panel?

On BeechTalk there is a guy who has produced a newer panel for the very old Bonanza'a and got it STC'd. From that thread I thought as the panel was structural it required certification. I have no idea, hence my novice question.

 

[texmex]

Sorry Web, you posted as I was typing. But you answer my question. Thanks very much.

 

[wireweinie]

I understand that, but they both tell you the same thing except one has an approved sticker on it (read charge thousands more)
As per L18C-95's post, what's to stop you buying the cheapest legal IFR unit, putting it out of harms way to check that box and then putting a non certified say Dynon flat screen or even the Garmin Aera 660 on the prime real estate?

Nothing at all. People up here do that all the time. Just be safe. These small units like the 660 are very capable but you still don't want to intentionally fly IFR with them. Just think of them as emergency insurance to get you out of a bind (in the category of 'better than nothing').



So I can take the above photo along to my sheet metal work man and ask him to make that panel?

Sure.

On BeechTalk there is a guy who has produced a newer panel for the very old Bonanza'a and got it STC'd. From that thread I thought as the panel was structural it required certification. I have no idea, hence my novice question.

If I modify an instrument panel for a customer, it's usually just a log entry. If I make a package deal and want to market it to everyone, I need to get faa 'permission' to produce aircraft parts. Either a PMA approval or an STC and the STC is usually easier to get.

Web

 

[wireweinie]

Wow. That posted weird. Hope you can sort it out. I was trying to address point by point.

Web

 

[texmex]

It read well to me. Thanks for the enlightenment.

 

[Wingwrench]

Sure it was a KY196? That's a 24V unit and the '53's were 12V aircraft. Typo or did you rig up some kind of power supply?

Web

Typo, KY97A is what I put in. 1 cup of coffee and below freezing here in FL is my excuse. :smile:

 

[wireweinie]

Your going to have to come up to Alaska and warm up, lol.

Web

 

[aktango58]

As for the STC'd or certified avionics vs non certified, George hit right with the 430 vs 660. The 660 is just a GPS. The 430 was 'certified' so they put it through a BUNCH more testing. And it has a metric ton more capabilities. You can legally and safely fly the GPS or the nav in full IFR. It will drive most primary navigation instruments available. It will also drive a secondary nav head, if you have need for one. It has vertical and horizontal outputs to couple to most auto pilots. And it has multiple data lines to allow it to be coupled to almost any combination of other instruments/items to make up a custom avionics system. Think about being able to upload a flight plan through a unit like a Flightstream. And if you have more than one 430, they can be coupled together to be uploaded simultaneously. You can input pressure altitude from a serial or Gray code altimeter or output GPS altitude to a unit such as a remote display. You can connect up to air/data computers. You can connect DME systems and RMI's. You can even use it, along with a UAT and transponder, to build an ADS-B system. I'm sure there's more that I'm not thinking of.

Web

You stated the 660 was just a GPS... the 430 also is a flip flop com, in addition to the the long list of cool stuff it does. FYI, the 430 is now outdated and not really supported...

consider that it there are better units that do more

 

[Steve Pierce]

Everybody is all over the Garmin. What about the Sandia Quattro?
https://sandia.aero/product/sai-340-quattro/

 

[OLDCROWE]

Everybody is all over the Garmin. What about the Sandia Quattro?
https://sandia.aero/product/sai-340-quattro/

Pretty busy display for that small, I keep the alt and speed tapes turned off on my Aspen for that reason and it’s about the same width just taller.

 

[stewartb]

Everybody is all over the Garmin. What about the Sandia Quattro?
https://sandia.aero/product/sai-340-quattro/

Doesn't the X Cub use the G3X Touch as primary and a Sandia as a backup? Given the commitment to Garmin to get the G3X approved I thought the choice of a Sandia was interesting.

 

[skywagon8a]

Everybody is all over the Garmin. What about the Sandia Quattro?
https://sandia.aero/product/sai-340-quattro/

$1,446 more is one good reason.

 

[sj]

How the panel looks in use.... :smile:

 

[OLDCROWE]

Wait!

Where’d the bungee go, better go back and look for it.

:lol:

 

[aktango58]

Have you considered just getting a Lear 25?

Slightly faster but not much more seating.

 

[texmex]

That wins the funny photo competition.

Give the iPad to the kids. The thing on the left to your wife and look out the window. Reference the thing at the bottom occasionaly for accurate tracking and groundspeed.

But if the lure of gadgets is irresistible then a Lear would be fun.

 

[Grant]

Let me know when you decide on the panel. We have some really nice brackets that allow for flush mounting of the G5.

FYI - The G5 is not perfectly square so we created two different "double" brackets, one that is Universal and can be used in either the horizontal or vertical, and another one that allows you to eliminate the gap when used in the double horizontal orientation. We also have a single bracket.




If this post breaks the rules - I'm happy to remove the post. I just dont want anyone to feel like they have to reinvent the wheel.

 

[Bart23Sept]

Just to give you an idea what a web-janitor can do, here's what a 27 yr old flight instructor (22 yrs ago) did in his parents' basement with a sheet of aluminum from aircraft spruce, some rubber mounting studs, second hand eyebrow lights, and a silk screen

i didn't have money at the time to update the instruments or radios or for a panel mounted clock/timer. I think I put the better audio panel in and pulled a good used KX-170B from the flight school's radio shop, probably got a bargain on it.