The International Cessna^® 170 Association

That's a good idea as well.
I could add a venturi as a backup to the pump.

Or go with two venturis, get rid of the pump and right angle starter and cut 10 pounds from the airplane.

Talked to my avionics guy today while getting the transponder checked out.

His opinion is that my steam gauges are fine since they are all less than 3 years old but it'd be a good idea to send out my vacuum pump to be overhauled.

He wasn't too keen on the Garmin GNS300XL tho. He said he installed quite a few when they first came out and almost everyone regretted not moving up to the 430 as the 300 is 'too manual' for what it cost.

His idea was a Garmin GNS340 (non waas) with a GI-106A head and that's all I'd need.

Thoughts?

I wouldn't bother to back up your vacuum pump. Depending on the hours on it I might replace it. What type is it anyway. If it is a dry pump there are carbon blades in a slot in the center hub that spins and centrical force pushes them out against the outside wall of the pump. the blades wear shorter and shorter till they fail by breaking, jamming the pump, shearing the Lovjoy coupling. Pretty simple actually and fairly predictable. More hours more wear and closer to failure.

The major problem with vacuum pumps is people think they run for ever and they don't plan and practice for their eventual failure.

Things have changed since I studied the regulations and did my IFR GPS install which consisted of a Garmin 155, annunciator and Collins 351 OBS. My radios were also Collins and used the same OBS. The 155 was not a moving map but it was capable of driving a Gamin hand held so I used a Garmin Pilot III for that.

Today with the 430 mounted within a certain visual angle to the pilot, an annunciator may not be required. You may already have an OBS that the GPS can drive.

The progression of Garmin IFR certifiable GPSs is the 155, 155xl, 300xl, 430, 530 then 430W and 530W. Apollo was Garmins only real competition and they bought them out. Apollo had the GX55, GX60 and CNX80, all IFR certified. Under Garmin the CNX became the GNS480.

If you want IFR GPS cheap I'd look at the 300xl or the King KLN 89B or KLN 90. None of these units are as main stream and capable as the 430 but they work and are legal. A non-waas 430 might be the way to go today though when all is said and done.

I'm starting from scratch. No CDI or anything.

I first thought about the GNS300XL setup here
http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_ ... KI204.html

But my avionics guy said for the effort to install, just go with the 430.
...at double the price tho, I don't know if I will take advantage of what the 430 provides extra.

I have a wet vacuum pump with unknown hours. Last log entry was in the 1970's when it was put on the plane.

I already have an Aera 510 to aid things.

Trying to balance 'cheap' with 'safe' is a real challenge.

Ryan Smith wrote:Any experiences here with the GNS-480?

No personal experience, but I know the 480 has a small but dedicated following. It's got some nice features that 430 doesn't, like flight plan entry by V airways. The trouble is the 480 is old. It's officially "discontinued" by Garmin. So are the 430 and 530, but their installed base is so large those units will be supported for a long time. I've found it doesn't pay to be a contrarian when buying technology products.

bagarre wrote:I'm starting from scratch. No CDI or anything.

I first thought about the GNS300XL setup here
http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_ ... KI204.html

But my avionics guy said for the effort to install, just go with the 430.
...at double the price tho, I don't know if I will take advantage of what the 430 provides extra.

I have a wet vacuum pump with unknown hours. Last log entry was in the 1970's when it was put on the plane.

I already have an Aera 510 to aid things.

Trying to balance 'cheap' with 'safe' is a real challenge.

Cheap, safe, and functional. I've been going through the same thing for a few years. The 430 is great, but what good is a moving map mounted down by my knees? Considering the cost and number of /G flights I'm likely to make, I'm just going with good old VHF nav. VOR and ILS will allow me to file IFR and fly on days with 1000 foot ceilings. That's the minimum I need and I can live with it.

On the other hand, if you need to use your airplane for instrument training it would be good to have a GPS.

Lots of good advice here. I fly IFR in both the 170 and 195. I got my instrument rating in the 170 in 1980 with one nav-com, ADF, and transponder. That was acceptable equipment then, but not anymore, in my opinion. A 430W with 106A head or equivalent and transponder would be minimum acceptable today. If you can afford WAAS at all, it is well worth it. That is basically what I have in the 170 with a backup com and Garmin 396 with XM weather. I feel very comfortable with that setup.

That said, I do not fly in ice, thunderstorms or fog and I don't fly hard IFR to minimums in the 170. And that leaves a huge variety of conditions that are acceptable and very much preferred over scud-running thru towers, windmills, and hilly or mountainous terrain in crummy conditions. If the 170 had an autopilot to reduce my single-pilot workload, I would be more inclined to fly to lower personal minimums. As it is, I will only fly IFR into no less than MVFR conditions and mostly only fly into improving conditions unless the destination is forecast to stay above 1000 and 3 miles. I don't have to get anywhere in worse conditions than that. One aircraft salvager in Alaska has a great saying, "Pilots who don't have the time to wait for the weather to improve always have to time to go back and salvage the wreck if they survive".

What IFR does for a pilot is open doors. It allows you to sail right thru Class airspace, MOAs, Restricted Areas, etc without having to contact each controlling facility for permission. If deviations are needed, you'll get vectors instead of "stay clear of airspace" directions. Most of the time, I flightplan GPS/G "Direct" and get "Cleared as filed" almost every time unless going into Class B areas where Standard Departures/Arrivals are more commomly used. But, with a Foreflight or equivalent app on an iPad and with the 430W having all the arrivals/departures and transitions, that is almost a no-brainer these days. Before the 430W, my flightplan would also have "No SIDs/STARs" in the remarks. Now, I just look them up, load it up, and fly it.

As far as the installation in the 170, an annunciator is not required if the GPS and nav head units are placed in the area of the panel within the area deemed by the FAA as within the normal area of view. I do not know the specs on that but my 170 is exempt from the annunciator. The panel layout on my 170 has been the same since 1979 and I have several hundred hours of IFR using it. I have never had any trouble with the non-standard scan required, back and forth is as natural as the 6-pack to me.

Finally for those considering an Aspen, if your instrument panel has the two 3-1/8" holes in the center, one above the other, the Aspen will fit with no modification of the panel. It is designed to fit into existing holes. Only the two cans on the back of the Aspen will go into the panel. The actual unit will protrude in front of the instrument panel. The false instrument cover would be removed and not used. A new main panel would look a little better and most radio shops can CNC new panels in short order. I cut my own new panel in 1979 (which I'm still using) with a drill press and hole saw but anymore I would just let an expert do it.

If you need or can utilize flying IFR, the 170 is a good IFR airplane. The photos below show the same panel 30 years apart.

Real aviators fly "Conventional Geared Airplanes" with "Aircraft Instruments". Wanna bees fly "Tail Draggers" with "Steam Gauges".

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/conventional

1. Based on or in accordance with general agreement, use, or practice; customary: conventional symbols; a conventional form of address.

That sorta makes the little wheel in the back UNconventional nowadays.
And a glass panel is also considered an Aircraft Instrument.

So, I guess I'll keep flying my steam gauged tail dragger to avoid any ambiguity.

blueldr wrote:Real aviators fly "Conventional Geared Airplanes" with "Aircraft Instruments". Wanna bees fly "Tail Draggers" with "Steam Gauges".

OK...that's about it... Time for our dear, beloved, bluEldr to head for the assisted-living-place. He's finally gone over-the-hill.

REAL aviators fly Needle-Ball-Airspeed! Qualified pilots fly "Steam Gauges" (air-driven gyros) and, Wannabees only fly magic-moving-maps with no SA.

The only "reliable" replacement for venturiis...is a wet vacuum pump. They typically run the entire TBO before overhaul and rarely fail. Get yours serviced, and renew the plumbing, overhaul your gyros, and you're well-equipped.
Get a magic, moving-map for ease-of-use, but stay qualified on partial panel. (T&B/Airspeed and/or individually-powered 2nd A.H. is your backup plan.)

You didn't mention the Apollo SL 30 & 60 driving an HSI with an annunciator and 496 on top. I don't fly IFR but have it setup if needed.

John

John your right I didn't mention the SL30. I believe that if Apollo had remained in business, the Garmin line would be much better than it is. When Garmin bought Apollo I believe it was to squash their line of superior products.