What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

IFR training-GTN 625 VS 650 in my RV

Rrhsch

Rrhsch

Active Member
My question is to the VAF community CFII?s. Can I get my instrument rating in my own RV if it is only equipped with a G3X System and a GTN 625? (No VOR or ILS ) Will it be necessary to have a GTN 650 installed to meet the minimum requirements for training and check-ride?

The GTN 625 is discounted thousands of dollars less with the G3X touch system and the installation is much easier. I know I would be missing the VOR and ILS features but, in an emergency, a Sporty?s SP-400 on a RAM mount or similar set-up would give me those features for far less dollars.
 
rely

Rrhsch said:
My question is to the VAF community CFII?s. Can I get my instrument rating in my own RV if it is only equipped with a G3X System and a GTN 625? (No VOR or ILS ) Will it be necessary to have a GTN 650 installed to meet the minimum requirements for training and check-ride?

The GTN 625 is discounted thousands of dollars less with the G3X touch system and the installation is much easier. I know I would be missing the VOR and ILS features but, in an emergency, a Sporty?s SP-400 on a RAM mount or similar set-up would give me those features for far less dollars.
Click to expand...

From the Instrument Test Standards:

Aircraft and Equipment Required for the Practical Test
The instrument rating applicant is required by 14 CFR part 61 to
provide an airworthy, certificated aircraft for use during the practical
test. Its operating limitations must not prohibit the Tasks required on
the practical test. Flight instruments are those required for
controlling the aircraft without outside references. The required radio
equipment is that
which is necessary for communications with air traffic control (ATC),
and for the performance of two of the following nonprecision
approaches: very high frequency omnidirectional range (VOR),
nondirectional beacon (NDB), global positioning system (GPS)
without vertical guidance, localizer (LOC), localizer-type directional
aid (LDA), simplified directional facility (SDF), or area navigation
(RNAV) and one precision approach: instrument landing system
(ILS), GNSS landing system (GLS), localizer performance with
vertical guidance (LPV) or microwave landing system (MLS). GPS
equipment must be instrument flight rules (IFR) certified and contain
the current database.
Note: A localizer performance with vertical guidance (LPV) approach
with a decision altitude (DA) greater than 300 feet height above
terrain (HAT) may be used as a nonprecision approach; however,
due to the precision of its glidepath and localizer-like lateral
navigation characteristics, an LPV can be used to demonstrate
precision approach proficiency (AOA VI Task B) if the DA is equal to
or less than 300 feet HAT.

Assuming that you have the LPV qualified (WAAS) it looks like you can use the GPS for your training and checkride, from how I read the regs. I would check with your planned DPE and instructor to be sure that is the local interpretation.

John
 
I agree with John. You can do RNAV non-precision and LPV for precision according to the ACS.

We have a good number of LPV approaches in our area (MKE Metro).
 
My read is a little different -- you might have trouble finding two different kinds of GPS-based non-precision approaches. I'm not sure that the GTNs will let you fly a non-precision GPS approach if LPV is available, and there are only about a third as many LP approaches as LPV approaches. And I don't know if VOR approaches with GPS overlays will count, or if they're in the GTN625.

As somebody else pointed out, your best bet is to check with your local Designated Pilot Examiner -- they're the ones who will have to sign you off. And contact Garmin to get exact answers where I was only able to give hints.

Ed
 
You should check with the DPE you intend to use, there seem to be multiple different interpretations of this.
 
This is a mess. Why can?t the FAA hire a decent tech writter? ?GPS? approach? Then later, ?RNAV?. Nowhere, the current ?RNAV (GPS)?. My reading: one LNAV, one LPV to 300? or higher DA; one LPV to 250 or 200?. Now, if I ran the world: I think your idea of having a RAM mounted VOR as a backup is a good idea. If I were the DPE I?d ask you to demonstrate its use on an approach. (This would also satisfy part of emergency procedures). Problem solved.
As everyone else has said, ask the DPE what he wants. Also remember to ask about an experimental. They are allowed to decline EAB aircraft at their option.
 
According to ACS prices, since the 175 and 375 were announced, there is no longer a discount for the 625/G3X deal.
 
iwannarv said:
It is up to your examiner. I flew a G1000 equipped 172 on my IFR checkride a month ago. Although equipped with ILS capability (airplane and airport), we still used the LPV as the precision approach.
Click to expand...

That?s not the question. The question is, for the two non-precision approaches, did the examiner allow two gps based approaches (LNAV, LPV to >300??) or did you do a LOC or VOR approach?
 
I just did my IPC with a FAA DE in my RV 9 with G3X touch and 625 GTN. The examiner said it meets all the requirements.
 
Check Ride

I did all my IFR training and checkride in my RV. Equipped with only with the 625. If I was installing equipment now, I would go with the 175. Less expensive than the G3X 625 deal that Garmin was running
 
I have a G3X Touch and GTN 625. My instructor and the DPE both said that would be insufficient to meet the requirements to fly 2 types of non-precision approaches. This seems to be up for interpretation until the FAA comes forward with something more specific.
 
Just buy a handheld VOR receiver, like the one available from Shorty's, and use that for your second type of approach.

The certification is when you log the VOR check.
 
DPE

Find a different DPE. The only difference in flying an ILS verses an LPV approach down to 200 feet is the color of the line you follow.
 
Tooch said:
Find a different DPE. The only difference in flying an ILS verses an LPV approach down to 200 feet is the color of the line you follow.
Click to expand...

Maybe if you discount the increasing sensitivity on the LOC/GS the closer you get to the xmittter on the ILS vs the fixed sensitivity once you reach the MAP on the LPV lateral guidance.
 
Last edited:
N941WR said:
Just buy a handheld VOR receiver, like the one available from Shorty's, and use that for your second type of approach.

The certification is when you log the VOR check.
Click to expand...

The requirements listed in an earlier post clearly state that certified equipment must be used as well as the FAA stating that all IFR equipment must be "installed" in another area of the regs.

Larry
 
lr172 said:
The requirements listed in an earlier post clearly state that certified equipment must be used as well as the FAA stating that all IFR equipment must be "installed" in another area of the regs.

Larry
Click to expand...

The certification for VIR receivers occurs when you perform the check and log it. That's why you can use a handheld receiver.

There is no "certification" for VOR's like there is for a GPS. I know, it seems odd, but those are the regs.
 
Last edited:
John Owen said:
From the Instrument Test Standards:

Aircraft and Equipment Required for the Practical Test
The instrument rating applicant is required by 14 CFR part 61 to
provide an airworthy, certificated aircraft for use during the practical
test. Its operating limitations must not prohibit the Tasks required on
the practical test. Flight instruments are those required for
controlling the aircraft without outside references. The required radio
equipment is that
which is necessary for communications with air traffic control (ATC),
and for the performance of two of the following nonprecision
approaches: very high frequency omnidirectional range (VOR),
nondirectional beacon (NDB), global positioning system (GPS)
without vertical guidance, localizer (LOC), localizer-type directional
aid (LDA), simplified directional facility (SDF), or area navigation
(RNAV) and one precision approach: instrument landing system
(ILS), GNSS landing system (GLS), localizer performance with
vertical guidance (LPV) or microwave landing system (MLS). GPS
equipment must be instrument flight rules (IFR) certified and contain
the current database.
Note: A localizer performance with vertical guidance (LPV) approach
with a decision altitude (DA) greater than 300 feet height above
terrain (HAT) may be used as a nonprecision approach; however,
due to the precision of its glidepath and localizer-like lateral
navigation characteristics, an LPV can be used to demonstrate
precision approach proficiency (AOA VI Task B) if the DA is equal to
or less than 300 feet HAT.

Assuming that you have the LPV qualified (WAAS) it looks like you can use the GPS for your training and checkride, from how I read the regs. I would check with your planned DPE and instructor to be sure that is the local interpretation.

John
Click to expand...

Is this a showstopper?
 
bkervaski said:
We have Airworthiness Certificates.
Click to expand...

You are correct, all of our planes are "certified", we are certified as "Experimental - Amateur Built" aircraft.

You should be good to go, as long as the instructor and the person giving your check ride agree.
 
Brantel said:
Maybe if you discount the increasing sensitivity on the LOC/GS the closer you get on the ILS vs the fixed sensitivity once in approach mode on the LPV.
Click to expand...

Just FYI, LPV has similar scaling sensitivity as a localizer...increases the closer you get to the runway. The obstacle evaluation trapezoid is identical based on similar sensitivity. Course width on a standard LPV approach at threshold is 350' each side of centerline.
 
aerovin said:
Just FYI, LPV has similar scaling sensitivity as a localizer...increases the closer you get to the runway. The obstacle evaluation trapezoid is identical based on similar sensitivity. Course width on a standard LPV approach at threshold is 350' each side of centerline.
Click to expand...

I was screwed up on my terms and was not very clear but I fixed my prior post to convey what I was trying to state. Sorry for the confusion.

ILS gets increasingly sensitive all the way to the xmitter. LPV is linear in lateral guidance sensitivity from the MAP to touchdown. Otherwise I agree all the way around. Pretty much worthless info but a difference non the less.
 
Last edited:
N941WR said:
The certification for VIR receivers occurs when you perform the check and log it. That's why you can use a handheld receiver.

There is no "certification" for VOR's like there is for a GPS. I know, it seems odd, but those are the regs.
Click to expand...

You may be correct, that nav receivers don't require TSOs, though I didn't think so. Either way, the regs are clear that all equipment necessary for IFR flight must be installed.

Larry
 
iwannarv said:
Specifically I did a VOR-A/DME arc, VNAV, and LPV. So I did use green needles on one.

As mentioned I have seen reports of guys here using only a WAAS GPS for their checkride. I would assume LNAV, VNAV, and LPV would suffice. If those are too much alike for the DPE, then maybe you could find an approved GPS overlay to a VOR or NDB to satisfy. Sounds like its not consistent across DPEs.
Click to expand...

What is a VNAV approach?
 
BobTurner said:
What is a VNAV approach?
Click to expand...

Specifically calling out the vertical portion of the LNAV/VNAV category of a GPS approach. Fly LNAV only, or LNAV/VNAV for the checkride. I have choices of either.


I'll just remove my comments from this thread. Seems like I don't have the superior IFR lingo down,
 
Last edited:
iwannarv said:
Specifically calling out the vertical portion of the LNAV/VNAV category of a GPS approach. Fly LNAV only, or LNAV/VNAV for the checkride. I have choices of either.


I'll just remove my comments from this thread. Seems like I don't have the superior IFR lingo down,
Click to expand...

This just shows how complicated this whole business is.
?LNAV +V? is an LNAV approach, uses LNAV minimums. It will show an advisory glide slope which you may choose to use, but it?s still a non-precision approach with an MDA.
?LNAV/VNAV? was originally designed for those the a TSO 129 GPS, plus additional equipment (database and altimeter) which could generate a GS. Modern TSO 145/146 gos boxes are more accurate, so if an LPV is authorized (I don?t think LNAV/VNAV is ever annunciatrd) you may, at your option, use the higher DA associated with LNAV/VNAV. Does this count as a different approach than the LPV? I don?t know, but it seems strange.
 
I talked to my DPE and he said I will need to use another plane with a VOR if I only install a GTN 625 or GPS 175. So, instead of the extra $$$ and work that would be needed to install a GTN 650, I will take my check ride is two airplanes. There is a 150 spam can on my filed with a VOR that I can rent for this purpose. I can only hope the FAA changes its rules before my check ride.
 
Something to consider

During your practical you may need to file a flight plan in which you will probably use GPS approach for your destination airport. All is good. However, for your alternate airport, what approach will you use? Precision or non precision it will probably need to be something other than GPS. I think this scenario is covered on the instrument written exam.

I?ve got a Garmin 625 in my RV-9 and added an SL30 for the VOR. Instead of adding a DME I use gps for distance calculation. I got a great deal on the SL-30 and it has been a good box for both backup communication and ILS work. However, all things considered, I wished I had gone the other route and got either a Garmin 650 or Avidyne 440/540. The reason is that my Advanced Flight EFIS has a limited number of serial ports like they all do and that SL-30 uses one that could have been better used by another component. The 650 or 440/540 all in one box would have only used one serial port freeing up one.

Good luck on your training!
 
I did my IFR a couple of years ago in my 7 with G3X and 650. Since then I file almost every flight when traveling, returning the other day I was 2 hrs in the soup with low ceilings at the destination and surrounding airports. Destination airport has both LPV and ILS, I normally do the LPV but always have the ILS tuned so it's ready to go. In some ways the ILS can be easier as you can capture it without some of the restrictions of the LPV. But regardless of that, having the capability to shoot multiple approaches at the destination is comforting to say the least.

Honestly your life pretty much depends on your equipment at this point, trying to save a some dollars may look good on paper, but may not look so good when you're actually doing it for real.
 
Last edited:
grubbat said:
. SNIP
I?ve got a Garmin 625 in my RV-9 and added an SL30 for the VOR. Instead of adding a DME I use gps for distance calculation. I got a great deal on the SL-30 and it has been a good box for both backup communication and ILS work. However, all things considered, I wished I had gone the other route and got either a Garmin 650 or Avidyne 440/540. The reason is that my Advanced Flight EFIS has a limited number of serial ports like they all do and that SL-30 uses one that could have been better used by another component. The 650 or 440/540 all in one box would have only used one serial port freeing up one.

Good luck on your training!
Click to expand...

Could you use the B inputs on your ARINC for the SL-30 instead of a EFIS serial port?

Carl
 
Mission

Retirement for me is nearing. I started out as a sport pilot and continued my training to a PPL. I am flying a RV12 ELSA with dual G3X touch EFIS and autopilot that I built. My current minimums are MVFR with >2000 ft ceiling forecasted and travel no further then 50 miles of home. My retirement goal and mission with the RV12 is to fly where the weather is not (VFR). I won?t have the need or desire to push the IFR weather envelope with the RV12. I don?t want to be stuck at an airport just because the ceilings are 900ft AGL with tops at 3500ft and VFR 5 miles away. This has happened. I won?t plan a trip to fly 50 miles in the soup. This is one of the reasons for choosing the GPS 175. If my mission changes so will the plane.

I have given this a lot of thought. The GPS 175 fits my mission with the RV12. I will also have a hand held radio with VOR and ILS as an emergency back-up just in case I find myself in real trouble (Poor planning or GPS blackout). I will train with the hand held radio but, I will not be able to use it for the check ride.

The RV12 has proven to be a good aircraft and capable of doing cross country trips at a retirement pace. If I buy or build a more capable plane, I would incorporate the GTN 650.
 
grubbat said:
During your practical you may need to file a flight plan in which you will probably use GPS approach for your destination airport. All is good. However, for your alternate airport, what approach will you use? Precision or non precision it will probably need to be something other than GPS. I think this scenario is covered on the instrument written exam.

Good luck on your training!
Click to expand...

If your gps is TSO 129 (non-WAAS) then this is correct. Either the primary or the alternate must have a non-GPS approach that you have the equipment on board to use. If your on board gps is TSO 144/145 (WAAS), this restriction does not apply.

BTW, with respect to all-in-one box vs two boxes: Tough call. Panel space, data ports favor one box. But if one box dies, you’d sure wish you had had two to start with.
 
Put me down as another one who prefers to have all the IFR tools available in my tool kit to give me options even though I fly enroute and terminal GPS 99% of the time (legacy G3X, GTN 650, and SL-30). Case in point I flew 2 long IFR x-countries last year where large portions of the routes had NOTAM?d with GPS outages due to military testing. I never lost GPS reception but no way would I have ever launched without VOR/LOC/GS capability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top