Upgrading avionics for instrument rating training in C172

[samsonwilliams]

I wants to start training for an instrument rating and is looking at a C172 to buy (our 170 won’t quite cut it). It has a PMA6000b audio panel,GNS430W with GDI206, KX155, and GTX335 ADSB, steam horizon and DG. Would like to get rid of vacuum pump so
thinking of installing two G5‘s or equivalent. I’m still stuck back in the early 80s on this so need some help on advice for her. Let me know what you think. Thank you.

[voorheesh]

I am an active CFII and had a student with a G5 equipped 182 year or so ago. He was able to eliminate his vacuum system but was unable to use the G5 to replace pitot static leaving the airplane with redundant instrumentation. This became an obstacle in developing a proper scan. So my advice is to be careful selecting the platform to be used for instrument training. Once you have an instructor lined up focus on that person for best advice. Use a reputable avionics shop for any installation. Make sure the modifications are approved for flight under IFR in the make and model being used.

My school uses Cessna172SP with G1000 and we have a Redbird training device. We find this an ideal combination. The Redbird can also be configured with analogue gauges if a client decides to operate an older model. I believe that a good school with up to date equipment is comparable to or possibly better than buying an airplane just for instrument training. Good luck and I’m sure others on this site will have useful information/advice as well.

[GAHorn]

What year-model 172?

[hilltop170]

I’m all for the new digital instrumentation and navigators and have equipped my plane with them. That said, I would not take anything for having earned my instrument rating in my 170 with an old school analog raw data instrument panel, ADF, and nav-com radio with glide slope. You have to have a clear mental picture of what is happening to be able to fly the airplane instead of looking at moving maps and magenta lines showing you the way.

[voorheesh]

I’m all for the new digital instrumentation and navigators and have equipped my plane with them. That said, I would not take anything for having earned my instrument rating in my 170 with an old school analog raw data instrument panel, ADF, and nav-com radio with glide slope. You have to have a clear mental picture of what is happening to be able to fly the airplane instead of looking at moving maps and magenta lines showing you the way.

I had the same IFR training in an old 172 many years ago. But we still train those skills in the technically advanced airplanes. ADFs have virtually disappeared but G1000 has RMI capabilities and the ILS/VOR frequencies can be operated independently from the Flight Plan/stored approach functions. We practice navigation relying only on these. They are taught as abnormal situations in case of GPS malfunction. Aircraft control and instrument scan with full or partial panel, remain emphasis items. I believe IFR training is as robust now as it was over 50 years ago when many of us started.

I did not mean to denigrate the G5 suggested by OP. I just wonder if that’s the best system for initial training. Once Instrument rated and with some experience, the G5 is an affordable and excellent system IMO.

[brian.olson]

I need to agree with voorheesh on this one ... I earned my IFR ticket in my 170 a few years ago with a single nav/comm and one VOR/ILS head - and all steam gauges. It was tough going and really stretched the brain cells. The (almost) hardest part was convincing my instructor that it "could" be done (he learned on glass, not steam gauges). But I/we did it. It took a lot of planning, concentration, and meticulous attention to detail during flight but I became very good at the mechanics and procedures of flying with limited instruments and constantly cross-checking everything (I flew of OSH a week after getting my ticket and a fair amount of it was IFR). Shortly thereafter installed a Garmin 650 and G5 into the panel. The skills never leave and it really pounds into your head the fact that navigation isn't just following the magenta line.

My own, personal opinion: try it with your current panel. Tough it out. Fly a home simulator to supplement the cockpit training. REALLY work hard to be as precise as you can. Fly off paper charts to begin with, track your position with lines and dots. Get super good at timing between dots, waypoints, and approach fixes - adjust and re-adjust. Then upgrade the equipment and continue to fly with your instructor and the magenta and green lines. You can do this.

[GAHorn]

The new/advanced instrumentation incorporated into panels can create “tunnel vision” for pilots.

A regular, full-scan of the instrument panel is paramount, in my opinion.

As a simulator instructor pilot in jet sims, I often observed highly experienced pilots completely Miss important clues to their situational-awareness because they had developed a habit of relying upon the Primary Flight Display … and failing to scan for other indicators which might reveal erroneous information.

That is a value, which I feel Richard points out well… in learning with multiple gyroscopic indicators…which operated independently and which can reveal instrument failures PFDs and MFDs such as the newer electronic displays cannot.

The old adage “all your Eggs in one basket” comes to mind.

[rnealon1]

For what it's worth my son and I did all his Instrument and CFII training in the 170 with venturi steam gauges, although we also have the GNX 375 navigator.

Echoing everyone here it made him an excellent instrument pilot and instructor with a great scan. It was a lot of work but he is glad that he has the "old school" background. He knows what generated that magenta line.

Best of luck with this.

Bob

[aadrew10]

I earned my instrument and commercial in my 170a last year. Dual venturis and a GNS430. Great for poking through overcast layers. The GPS really removes the need for a second needle.
I was passed up by my first two instructor contacts who despite being enthusiastic about the airplane and working with me, after “consulting” with their fellow instructor brethren, decided that their personal IFR equipment minimums required dual electronic AI/HSI setups (G5s, GI275 etc). Finally, a capable young corporate pilot picked me up (180 owner) and explained his philosophy “there are many ways to mitigate risk. Fancy equipment is just one of them”

image000002.jpeg

IMG_5515.jpeg

[GAHorn]

I earned my instrument and commercial in my 170a last year. Dual venturis and a GNS430. Great for poking through overcast layers. The GPS really removes the need for a second needle.
I was passed up by my first two instructor contacts who despite being enthusiastic about the airplane and working with me, after “consulting” with their fellow instructor brethren, decided that their personal IFR equipment minimums required dual electronic AI/HSI setups (G5s, GI275 etc). Finally, a capable young corporate pilot picked me up (180 owner) and explained his philosophy “there are many ways to mitigate risk. Fancy equipment is just one of them”
image000002.jpeg
IMG_5515.jpeg

@aadrew10: Great First Post!
It’s post’s like this one….that makes me wish we had a “Like” Icon in our software.

[dstates]

I already had my instrument rating when I bought my 170A about 5 years ago, but I put the money into it to make it IFR capable (when I bought it there was no venturi or vacuum system, no attitude indicator, no DG, and just a KX170B nav com that was questionable. I went all out and put in dual G5's with a GNX 375 (GPS and transponder in one) and a new nav com that was reliable. I wouldn't change that decision for anything. I don't fly much actual IFR in my 170, but it is great for staying current/proficient and it would be a great platform for training.