The International Cessna^® 170 Association

Lot's of cool new stuff at S&F this year.
Too bad our trusty 170 was not included in this one

http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All- ... nounce-STC

I have a 56 172 and my AI is acting up...something to think about.

It would appear to me that if this system is approved for installation in the Cessna 172, It should not take a lot of effort to get an approval for the C-170.
I suspect that the relative obscurity of the C-170, due to its age, and the number of active models in comparison with the C-172, is probably what kept it out of the STC. It will be interesting to see if someone makes the effort to get a approval for the C-170. It looks to me to be a really neat instrument at a very competative price when compared to all the "Clocks" it replaces.

I'm hopeful that this is the beginning of a new way of doing things, not just an isolated approval of one device and one Approved Model List. They claim it is, but we'll see. Still, do I really want to replace my venturi-driven mechanical gyros with glass? I overhaul them every 10-15 years and they just work. No weird glitches, firmware upgrades, or manufacturers going away, leaving the gizmo orphaned. Glass costs far more to own than steam gauges, and the more integrated the systems the worse it is.

You can supposedly submit feedback to the committee members in support for additional aircraft models. Maybe we should have the 170 association members submit that info. If we get enough support then maybe they will add the 170 to the STC.

My instructor threw a couple vacuum pump failures at me in the Sim last weekend. One was on a missed approach, and...well, crash and burn. It was a sobering experience. If someone flies a reasonable amount of actual IFR, this is not a lot of money for a lot of safety.

I would image if the STC includes the early 172's it won't be much stretch to add in the 170. If EAA won't do it, just buy the STC and use the approved data as the basis for a 337. Should be a slam dunk.

I agree it might be good for the association to approach them. Maybe we could organize a group buy to help convince them?

DEM

For an emergency get-me-down backup, it's hard to beat the Dynon D2. It's half the price, or better, and portable.

It sounds like this STC is the beginning of big changes in whats available for small aircraft. Can't wait to see what else becomes available.
https://youtu.be/EnqCHu1NkL0

If nothing else we pilots are an optimistic bunch.

I figure we'll see cheap, makes sense avionics about the same time we see medical reform. Any day now.

Bruce Fenstermacher wrote:If nothing else we pilots are an optimistic bunch.

I figure we'll see cheap, makes sense avionics about the same time we see medical reform. Any day now.

Bruce, I think the difference here is that EAA/Dynon have broken through FAA barriers. That will make it hard for them to deny others from entering with their products.

If nothing else we pilots are an optimistic bunch.

I'll be the foil to this group; ah...never mind.

lowNslow wrote:

Bruce Fenstermacher wrote:If nothing else we pilots are an optimistic bunch.

I figure we'll see cheap, makes sense avionics about the same time we see medical reform. Any day now.

Bruce, I think the difference here is that EAA/Dynon have broken through FAA barriers. That will make it hard for them to deny others from entering with their products.

I agree with Karl. While I'm not expecting the floodgates to open, this is precedent setting.

DEM

Now, if we could just find a way to get rid of those old "Magnetos" that are left over from World War One, their resultant ignition harnesses, and twenty five to fifty dollar spark plugs, - - - - -?

After all, multi millions of automobiles did away with that type of ignition systems and went electronic about thirty years ago. When was the last time you coughed up five hundred dollars to have the ignition sysem in your automobilr overhauled?

Like anything, the fist one is the hardest.
I recently got a set of 175 wings approved for 95D because I happened to call the right guy and the right FSDO at the right time.
He happened to JUST go thru the process for another 170 and had it all sorted out.
It took me three weeks time to have all the paperwork approved.

EAA and Dynon have just accomplished the hard part and built a framework ( and set precedence ) that other manufacturers can follow.
This is in fact very good news.

David, maybe I'm a nattering nabob of negativism, but I'm not holding my breath.