IFR 170b

[flylow]

I have read a lot on here about those that fly 170 for "light" IFR. I am interested in getting my instrument rating, and prefer to get it in my 170 because of the cost (and experience). I don't know much about avionics. I have read the regulations for getting my 170 certified for IFR flight. One of the problems I am having is trying to figure out what will be best for my 170 for instruments to get my instrument rating. Since I don't have my rating, I really don't know why I'd want some equipment over other equipment.

I currently have Bendix/King KLX135A, Garmin GTX320, Narco MK12D Comm/Nav. Last annual I had a new altimeter installed with transponder as well as the Pitot / Static check.

What should be my priority for getting this Airplane instrument ready? What do I need? I really don't want to put much money into the panel . Instruction in a 172 around here is $190 dual. Instructor and gas in the 170 is $95 /hr. So I'd like to keep this upgrade reasonably "cost effective" so I can use the excuse that I am saving money by not renting a 172.

Some things I think I'll need: better panel lighting for night flights, new compass, new airspeed indicator (or calibrate it), new VSI, new clock.


Thanks for any help! I really don't know what I need, so any advice is greatly appreciated!

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

I do not believe the KX135 to be an IFR certifiable GPS, so you will only be able to use it for situational awareness. Replacing it with a certifiable unit would be cost prohibitive.

So what do you NEED to accomplish your goal. As a student you need to demonstrate among other things a precision and a non precision approach. You should be able to do the non-precision approach with the Narco 12D. But you didn't say so I will assume you don't have a glide slope. So that is the only piece of instrumentation you will need to add in order to be able to do precision approaches.

Of course that might be easier said than done. I'm not familiar enough with Narco to know if all 12Ds can channel a gllideslode receiver, or whether all their indicators are capable of displaying a glide slope. Another factor is whether the glide slope receiver would be built into the radio itself requiring replacement of the radio or whether it is an add on. You will also have to deal with a glideslope antenna which can be the same as the VOR antenna using a splitter or a separate antenna altogether.

Others here have Narco so I'm sure they can help and of course you can always call Narco and ask.

Not necessarily necessary but might be nice to have while demonstrating your precision approach would be a marker beacon. These can be part of an audio panel or bought separate. They also require an antenna. Audio panels like the King KMA20 with the marker beacon can be bought for less that $200 but of course panel space might not be available and the cost to install the could easily be twice to three times the purchase price. I'd look at the approaches in your area and talk to an instructor to see if a marker beacon is a must.

[Robert Eilers]

One of the first things I would do is arrange to have the pitot/static system checked. In order to operate an airplane or helicopter, in controlled airspace under IFR, each static pressure system, each altimeter and each automatic pressure altitude reporting system must be tested to insure it meets minimum tolerances outlined in part 43. The pitot/static system test is required every 24 calendar months. Many of these older airplanes have leaky systems, especially those that have not been flying IFR. You might discover your spending may have to begin with bringing the pitot/static system up to par. Most pitot/static tests can be done for $200 or so.

[Kellym]

One of the first things I would do is arrange to have the pitot/static system checked. In order to operate an airplane or helicopter, in controlled airspace under IFR, each static pressure system, each altimeter and each automatic pressure altitude reporting system must be tested to insure it meets minimum tolerances outlined in part 43. The pitot/static system test is required every 24 calendar months. Many of these older airplanes have leaky systems, especially those that have not been flying IFR. You might discover your spending may have to begin with bringing the pitot/static system up to par. Most pitot/static tests can be done for $200 or so.

Good advice,
Many folks get confused about IFR certification. All Cessna 170s are IFR approvable. There is nothing you have to do to the "airframe". You have to comply with the requirements of Part 91.205. You have to have an IFR certified altimeter, the static system certified..basically leak-free, and C170s will leak at the interface between the fuselage skin and the port...silicone or Pro-seal around the edge will fix that. You have to have the required gyros, one of which has to have different power source than the others. Usually electric turn and bank or turn coordinator, and vacuum DG and horizon. They can be venturi powered, but not recommended for real IFR as they frequently ice up, just like carburetor venturis.
There is a version of the Mk12D with G/S built in. I don't know the cost to upgrade one. It also requires the ID825 indicator with GS instead of the 824. You may do okay via Ebay for a straight slide in replacement. Excellent radio. I flew my 170, before I sold it, with a Mk12D with GS, a Bendix T12C ADF and a KX99 portable for Nav2/backup com(used a splitter on nav antenna for reliable VOR indication), IFR for many years. I added an EDO transponder that fit 3 1/8 hole. Today, the 2 1/4" Becker models would be better if there isn't room for a standard "flat" transponder.
The negatives...you won't have a standard "T" instrument layout, which makes scan harder, your radios will be under the yoke, making vertigo inducing look down motions to tune. Not so great while you are learning. On the positive side, much cheaper flight time, and really not much different than 172 as a learning platform.
K

[canav8]

FlyLow, I would like to offer this advise to you.
I would suggest that you go and fly a more modern plane that has a common T layout for your instrument work. Although it can be done in the 170, I am currently teaching primary in my 170. One of the hardest things for the student is the scan when instruments are spread out on the panel. I am not saying it can not be done, but it is a lot harder. Especially in turbulence. I know you want to save money but truthfully money would be better spent on aircraft that has this common pattern. Also you will have to find a CFII that is willing to teach in the 170. You will have to find a freelance instructor because the flight schools will not be able to insure, and also they want the money. Unless you work out some kind of deal, that will be difficult to come by.
The requirements for IFR require that you have VOR checks every 30 days. As the Pitot static test must be completed every 24 mths. and you must have a glideslope reciever. Some aircraft have this, some dont. IFR certifiable GPS currently are extremely expensive as previously mentioned. You can rent a plane for cheaper then that equipment install.
Pilot currency, The biggest problem I see here is that guys dont realize what it costs to stay current. You must do your precision an non precision approaches every 6 months. That may seem like a long time but it flys by. If you have access to an approved simulator, then that will help. Do you have the facilities close to you so that you can maintain that? When guys say they want to have their instrument rating, I tell them to examine the type of flying that they are doing or going to do. Although more training is always better, it can also lure you into a situation that you should never had considered without a rating. I am not trying to deter you from getting the rating, but seriously anyone that operates a 170 is usually doing it visually and for pleasure not to get somewhere because they have to. V/R Doug

[blueldr]

What the Heck! If you're going to fly IFR with the C-170, best you learn with it. Why learn in a standardized "T" set up and then go out and try to operate with a different configuration?

[hilltop170]

What should be my priority for getting this Airplane instrument ready? What do I need? I really don't want to put much money into the panel .

I got my instrument rating in my 170 and had a great experience doing it. If you intend to fly your plane IFR after you get the rating, spend the money on your plane instead of rent. Otherwise you'll have a rating and no good way to use it.

My instructor was and is a professional pilot who had me file and fly actual IFR whenever possible during my training. Even without the standard T-panel the scan is easy to adapt. Sure, the T-panel is more, well, standard, but it's not necessary. Look at the hodgepodge shotgun arrangement of instruments on most older planes. But they still flew them, and without modern avionics.

Take a look at the picture (most folks have seen it several times before so no comments from the peanut gallery) and you can see how my panel was arranged in 1979 when I set it up for instruments. I flew it a total of over 150 hours IFR between 1979 and 1984 when it was sold. I bought the plane back in 2006 and upgraded the panel again with Garmin stuff. I still have everything that was taken out of the old panel including two KX-170B's, two KI-209 G/S heads, KN-73 glideslope receiver, KR-22 marker beacon, KA-134 audio panel, and KT-76 transponder (although it was getting weak), all with trays and connectors, plus assorted instruments. I think you would want new antennas and coax. You could spend a little money on an IFR GPS (older, non-WAAS Garmin 430 units are available for much less than WAAS although WAAS is REALLY nice) where the ADF was and have a really functional panel/airplane. Or use a handheld moving map GPS instead of a panel mount but you won't be able to take advantage of the numerous GPS approaches available just about everywhere with the handheld.

If you are interested, PM me and I'll give you a smoking deal on everything, I've been waiting for someone who needs a complete low-cost package instead of parting it out.

As far as advice goes on flying actual IFR, if you stay away from ice, thunderstorms, and fog you'll have a long and happy life. Try to always file into improving or at least stable conditions, never deteriorating conditions. Decide early if you need to deviate or land short of your destination. Always give yourself several options, never let your options go down to one. A moving map GPS and fuel flow computer are the two things that have reduced my IFR anxiety more than anything else.

Good luck.

Click on picture to enlarge

[SteveF]

There are plenty of good IFR instructors around if you look hard enough. Many are free lance and only take a few students in their spare time.

You really want to look for someone who flies IFR for a living and does a little moonlighting on the side. The experience of these people in the system is so much more than a new instructor from a fair weather school that has no real experience in weather. It is so much better to have spent some time in real clouds then just a lot of time behind foggles. These people know the real world ins and outs of the system not just the technical application.

An instrument rating will make you much more aware of the resources available to you. You will become at home with communications and radio capabilities. You’re over all piloting skills should improve in the area of altitude, speed, and directional control. It is well worth the time and expense and you will find it a fun new world to learn about.

I also agree that you should do this training in the plane you are going to actually fly in IFR. Renting other planes just to see the modern equipment is great after you master the skills with the equipment you are going to normally use.

[GAHorn]

I do not wish to start an argument or cast any dispersion upon the opinon of anyone who has offered advice in this thread, ... all have good contributions. I am especially in agreement with Richard (hilltop170) and the oldpharrt (bluEldr).

I fly my own 170B in "light" IFR frequently. It has venturiis. It is largely myth (in my opinion) that venturiis have an "icing" problem, and especially so with regard to being anything similar to carb ice. (Carb ice forms because of the cooling effect of vaporizing fuel within the carb drastically "chills" the carb-throat thereby causing humidity/water to freeze within the carb, reducing airflow and loss of power. Ordinary gyro-venturiis have no proclivity for forming ice. The only way they will "ice up" is if the airplane is flying in icing conditions...and these C-170's are prohibited from flying in icing conditions. If you find you are picking up ice in your 170.... DEPART icing conditions immediately! Your airframe will quit before your gyros do...and besides .... THAT is why you have at least ONE electric gyro...in the event the vacuum gryos fail.)

A single engined airplane is not a good very-low-IFR condition airplane. The only reason to need gyros at the beginning of a takeoff roll is a low-viz takeoff...something you should NOT be attempting in a single engine airplane. If you cannot operated with at least 500' ceilings and 1 mile viz (typical non-precision approach minimums) then a single engine airplane is the wrong vehicle to select for that flight! What if you had engine difficulty? Was it smart to perform a zero-zero takeoff?

My personal minimums for single-engine IFR require that I be able to see the ground prior to impact. This generally requires that I have the ability to descend to special-VFR conditions beneath me.

I would not spend money on a failure-prone mechanical vacuum pump system when ...if you're flying... venturiis are vacuuming! There are few devices in modern airplanes more failure-prone than a dry vacuum pump. (If I did install a vacuum pump, I'd install a wet-pump. But a pump installation of ANY type is a prohibitively-expensive project unless one already has the engine/pump provisions. I simply am amazed at folks that spend that kind of money to get that kind of defective vacuum system. I also consider a marker-beacon system a complete waste of money and panel space. There is nothing less useful in any IFR airplane (unless you're shooting cat I/II appchs....which you will not in a 170.) Just my opinion.

But I guess that's why we all have our own airplanes....so we can have it like we like it.

Don't let folks try to tell you otherwise.....Bare minimums for an IFR 170 do NOT require vac-pump or a heated pitot,

By the way, another possible solution for you is to trade time in your airplane for equal time in a flight school's IFR 172. Just be certain you are comfortable with the level of experience of pilots and instructor-staff that will operate your airplane, and that your airplane is properly insured.

[flylow]

Thanks for all the replies.

I am familar with some of the regulations namely 91.411, 91,413, and 91.205. I had the pitot/static check done in October 09 so its good for 24 calender months (IAW 91.411).


The Garmin GTX320 is not certified for IFR flight. I don't think the MK12D has the glideslope receiver.


As far as the instructor goes, getting an instructor for the 170 is not a problem. The instructor who I did my tailwheel training with is one of the best around. He actually suggested upgrading the panel instead of renting another aircraft.

So if I go with the minimum I'm looking at:
Narco ID-825 VOR / LOC / Glideslope Indicator $800
Narco MK-12D NAV/COMM with Glideslope $1900
King KMA20 $500
+ installation = ???

What about DME? Should I install something like Narco DME-890 DME.

Also I have an electric turn and bank and heated pitot that I can get installed.

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

Your short list looks about right except the KMA20.

The KMA20 was just an example of a cheap way to get a marker beacon. There are other audio panels in the same price range like Collens and Narco that have a marker beacon receiver. You can also just buy a marker beacon receiver by itself. But as George points out a marker beacon may not even do you any good really and not worth even the low cost and bigger install hassle. Many marker beacons in my area are permanently out of service. If I was installing an audio panel, it would have a marker beacon otherwise I probably wouldn't.

I would not install a DME. You will use your GPS for that "situational awareness" information.

I wouldn't go out of my way to install the heated pitot. If you have a turn and bank already, are you sure it's not already electric? If not then yes I would install the electric one you have.

[flylow]

How much work is required for the heated pitot tube installation?

Yes the turn and bank is electric now. It is just old, but not broken so I guess it doesn't really need replaced...

[GAHorn]

How much work is required for the heated pitot tube installation?

Yes the turn and bank is electric now. It is just old, but not broken so I guess it doesn't really need replaced...

Excuse me for being blunt, but... what part of "You do not need a heated pitot" did you not understand?

If you are prohibited from flying in ice...then why do you need a heated pitot? (Besides... can you not fly without an airspeed indicator? ... if not...then why are you seeking an instrument rating? ... when you need more VFR training.

[flylow]

Excuse me for being blunt, but... what part of "You do not need a heated pitot" did you not understand?

I just read your signature "originality nut." Well I really don't want to debate I just was wondering what was involved. Besides I think the original pitot tube looks like it has seen better days (mine is pretty mangled)!

If you are prohibited from flying in ice...then why do you need a heated pitot? (Besides... can you not fly without an airspeed indicator? ... if not...then why are you seeking an instrument rating? ... when you need more VFR training.

What's an Airspeed indicator? Geez I never look at that thing! My old time instructor always made me feel and respond! So no, I don't need an ASI.

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

Well for starters I'll bet you have the familiar little L shaped heated pitot which has no approval for our 170s. So while it probably won't be a big deal, and many a 170 have them, the installation will most likely be deemed a major alteration and require an FAA approval on the form 337. The approved heated pitot for a 170 is a long straight affair and many of us have only seen a handful of them. I think we have a picture of one posted here somewhere.

Besides the approval for the installation as part of the installation you would probably want to power the heat part of the heated pitot. How big is your power source? How much do you already have wired to that source? If you have a 25 amp generator, and many 170s are smaller, you probably won't have enough generating capacity to power all your radios, panel lights and the heated pitot and also remain at or below 80% of the rating of the generator which is the limit.

So you need enough generated power, you need a wiring system large enough to carry the power including a fuse or breaker, and you need the approval to do it.

And when your done you have really not done anything to improve the IFR ability of the airplane. You might however be happy you replaced your present mangled tube which could be replaced very easily with another unmangled tube. Like I said I personally wouldn't put much effort in it.