Is your GPS IFR Legal?

[glafaille]

Greetings Mooneyspacers!

I've been looking for a C model Mooney for about 5 months now and have inspected the records of well over a dozen aircraft.  Most of the candidates fail the records check for various glaring problems.  

One of the common records problems is a GPS installed iin the panel that the owner THINKS is IFR legal but in fact it is not.  One gent even told me that any GPS installled in the panel was IFR legal.

A GPS that has the capability to be IFR legal can be installed such that it is legal for IFR flight or VFR only flight.  It is usually much cheaper to install to VFR standards than IFR standards, often VFR standards are specified as a way to save money.  More time is required and more expensive cabling and connectors are used for IFR installations.  Then there is the FAA paperwork and a test flight.

If you have a question you should contact your nearest radio shop and make an appointment to have them check your records to be sure.  

However, here is what I look for:

1.  GPS annunciator panel - a seperate panel mounted with GPS specific annunciators.

2.  Read the logbook entry - it should make a reference to an IFR installation, usually a test flight is required and should also be noted.

3.  Read the 337 and see if anything is mentioned concerning IFR legal flight

4.  I have seen mention in the logs of an STC but the STC listed does not apply to the make and model of the GPS or aircraft.  Look up the STC on the FAA wesite and read for yourself if one is mentioned.

5.  Do you have the flight manual supplement in your POH?  Also I believe the manual for the GPS is required to be carried onboard the aircraft, NOT stored with all the other paperwork junk at home.

If your aircraft does not have most of these, then your GPS installation may not be IFR legal, an appointment with your avionics shop might be a good idea.

By the way, if your GPS or GPS installation is not legal for IFR then it must be placarded.

[glafaille]

Here is a good example:

I just found an airplane I am getting serious about, it has a Garmin GNC300XL Comm/GPS which is legal for IFR enroute and non-precision approaches.  

Logbook entry below, no 337 or STC in aircraft records.  Is it legal for IFR?

[glafaille]

Continued- Logbook entry.

I called the installer who is a Avionics shop/Repair Station and asked about the logbook entry and lack of any supporting 337.  By the way the STC mentioned in the entry concerns the installation of a Garmin GNC155 GPS into Piper aircraft.

The installer told me that as long as a CDI for the GPS and an annunciator panel was installed, no 337 or STC was required and I was good to go for IFR.  

I then called the FAA and was told that the STC might be all that is required IF it was issued for that particular make and model of GPS installed in the make and model of my aircraft.  Any deviations from the STC require additional supporting documents (337) and proving flights.  As well as the annunciator panel, CDI, and a FAA approved flight manual supplement for the particular installation of GPS and aircraft.

Bottom line?  The GPS is not legal for IFR flight.  

Solution?  Use it for VFR only OR pay an avionics shop to certify it, which is not reasonable given that the shop will have to verify the entire installation including wires, connectors and antenna used, and then prepare a 337 and a flight manual supplement, submit everything to the FAA, and then perform the test flight.  Probably be cheaper to just get a new one!

Confusing stuff for sure!

 

 

[carusoam]

Confusing enough it is one of the highlights of the PPI.  

The most popular Garmin all in one boxes make it easy.  The further you get from the popular solution, the more challenges you get as the buyer...

1) Does the nav radio have IFR approach capability? Database of selectable instrument procedures.

2) Did the proper annunciators get mounted in the proper locations?

3) Did a blue light (source indicator light) get mounted on the panel to indicate the GPS vs. NAV1 source?

4) POH gets updated with a section of basic details of all the systems that are mounted in the plane.  JPI, AP, NavComs, speed brakes.

Knowing what you are looking for is helpful in the selection process before going to the PPI.  Early 90s GPSs are the most challenging for the various IFR capabilities that were available like enroute vs. the instrument procedures...

A full PPI can include testing the various nav radios and the AP.  If the install looks good, but the various boxes don't communicate properly, you want to know these things are working.  Part of the buying process is asking the owner how he uses his stuff.  If the seller explains the general step by step processes he uses for flying IFR, that is a good sign.  If he says, he bought it, but never used it, not so helpful...

What is the cost of a fully integrated GPS/AP combo? 30 - 50 AMU?  What is the value if it isn't installed properly?

Buying a plane sounds like a full time job.  It is, but it only takes a week or two to get it done correctly.

Just my thoughts,

-a-

[1524J]

   This was sent to me by my avionics shop for the KLN 89B which is installed in my plane when I asked about getting it IFR certified. As far as going through the wiring and connections to verify, if the equipment is in place and functions, that's good verification.

KLN-89B.pdf

[glafaille]

Buying a plane IS a full time job.  IF ONLY it was a week long period.  

FINDING a plane is in itself nearly a full time job that lasts for months.  Then once you THINK you find one, the REAL FUN begins when you start the PPI.

5 months now and counting.  Have cash but still no plane.

[Andy95W]

I agree that the GNC-300 is not legal for IFR as it is right now without the 337 and AFM supplement.

An avionics shop probably would not charge an extreme amount of money to IFR certify it, particularly if you were having other work done by that shop.  I had a similar experience with a Piper Aztec I owned,also with a GNC-300.  When I had the avionics shop install an STEC autopilot, they finished the IFR certification for free.

Definitely worth asking the question, and it could be a bargaining chip in negotiating for the airplane.

Edited April 5, 2016 by N1395W

[glafaille]

It does have an AFM supplement but I don't know about the blue light previously mentioned.  Maybe the blue light is part of the annunciator panel.

[carusoam]

The blue light may have gone out of style...

blue bulb on, meant GPS is the source.

blue bulb out, meant Nav1 is the source, or the bulb burned out... (Dumb alternative)

The blue bulb doesn't say anything more than what the switch position is. The other annunciators are equally effective, as well. They have to be part of your scan, they aren't much like a flashing warning light during the daytime.

Interesting thought....

Are the annunciators tied into the nav lights for brightness control?   Flying with the nav lights on during the day can be a hazard to being able to see interior lights...

Best regards,

-a-

[N601RX]

Is the AFM Supplement FAA Approved and have your plane serial number on it?  These manuals are one off's and only good for the specific serial number plane approved for.  If it does it very well may be legal for IFR. In addition to the requirements mentioned previously most older gps installs also require a connection to your encoder, but may not be required by all models.  These were installed under AC20-138 which has a couple of revisions.  If I remember correctly one of the revisions suggested as long as it was not connected to other complex system it did not need a 337.  Check the AFM Supplement and see if it has your serial number and a FAA signature on it.  The guidance on installing these changed over the years.

The blue light if for CDI's that share a nav source through an anunciator with a relay bank.  The blue light indicated it is connected to the gps.

[glafaille]

N601RX-

Thanks for your reply, it somewhat echoed what the FAA avionics inspector told me.  If the flight manual supplement is FAA approved for my make, model and serial number then it may be legal for IFR.  However he also said that a 337 was also required unless installed under an STC for that specific GPS in my make and model aircraft.  I will take another look at the flight manual supplement later this week.

Additionally, the shop that installed the GPS is not too far away.  I may try to get them to re-visit the paperwork issue in order to assure the GPS and installation is acceptable to the FSDO.

[N601RX]

Read through one of the not current versions of AC20-138.  The early versions said it was a major mod and required a 337, the newer versions suggested it might not be and I think the latest version basically removed most of the stuff regarding the older gps's that were certified to TSO 129.   If the shop went to the trouble of getting the Flight Manual Supplement approved then the intent was for it to be IFR.

From AC 138A

(iii) Minor alteration: Under the original AC 20-138, installation of GPS equipment required the use of approved data (under an STC or major alteration) because GPS was a new and unique technology. However, since GPS technology is now common and considerable experience has been obtained in the installation of GPS, approved data for every installation is no longer appropriate. Instead, installations that do not qualify as major alterations above should be accomplished as minor alterations. These installations should be based on acceptable data including the following:

[Godfather]

4 hours ago, carusoam said:

The blue light may have gone out of style...

blue bulb on, meant GPS is the source.

blue bulb out, meant Nav1 is the source, or the bulb burned out... (Dumb alternative)

The blue bulb doesn't say anything more than what the switch position is. The other annunciators are equally effective, as well. They have to be part of your scan, they aren't much like a flashing warning light during the daytime.

Interesting thought....

Are the annunciators tied into the nav lights for brightness control?   Flying with the nav lights on during the day can be a hazard to being able to see interior lights...

Best regards,

-a-

OUT OF STYLE!  Now you tell me after I just paid $30 for two bulbs...

[Hank]

5 hours ago, carusoam said:

The blue light may have gone out of style...

blue bulb on, meant GPS is the source.

blue bulb out, meant Nav1 is the source, or the bulb burned out... (Dumb alternative)

The blue bulb doesn't say anything more than what the switch position is. The other annunciators are equally effective, as well. They have to be part of your scan, they aren't much like a flashing warning light during the daytime.

Interesting thought....

Are the annunciators tied into the nav lights for brightness control?   Flying with the nav lights on during the day can be a hazard to being able to see interior lights...

Best regards,

-a-

I don't have bulbs of any color for this. My G430W is hooked up to CDI #1; the KY97A is hooked up to CDI #2. So it's up to me to know which radio I'm using then look at the appropriate indicator. And yes, it is a legal IFR install.

[carusoam]

This seems like a lesson in distraction, Distraction D103 sort of... (not as important to all Mooney drivers like D101, checking the light for gear down.)

The nice thing about the 430W is all the switching is internal to one box.  VOR, ILS and GPS all being delivered to a single CDI.

The blue light is used specifically to let you know the CDI might be getting a signal delivered from an unintended box.  Two radios typically supply two different CDIs. The ADF gets it's own display. The early GPSs didn't get their own display.  This is the basis of D103.

The act of tuning is a strong hint of what to expect you will get. Forgetting to flip the next switch may be a set up for a surprise.

An example of my aged 90's set-up:  GPS navigating the entire flight plan using the KLN90B/HSI, ending by intercepting an ILS using KX165/HSI.  Identify the proper ILS (Nav1) broadcast audibly, but make sure the HSI is being supplied by Nav1. No blue light.

The usual stress of being late in the flight, followed by high workload at the end with constant contact with ATC. Tuning in the ILS, confirmed by listening to get the proper audible.  The distracted brain is comfortably waiting for something that isn't coming...

The final step, in this case is to confirm the blue light is out...

I have probably left something out...

Best regards,

-a-

[gsxrpilot]

No offense intended but who wants to put money on the over/under on how many more months it takes Glafaille to find a Mooney acceptable to his standards?

I'll say 12 months. Who wants the over/under on this?

[Bob - S50]

I see a lot of nice looking panels with a GPS.  I see many without an annunciator for that GPS.  When we installed our GTN650, there is a requirement for annunciation of the navigation source to be within the pilot's primary field of view.  The manual defines the field of view in horizontal and vertical dimensions.  It gives a couple options as to where the measurements are taken.  If the GPS/VLOC indication on the GPS isn't within the field of view, an annunciator placed within that field of view is required for IFR certification.  There are a couple other distance limits too, but they are less restrictive.  On our airplane, the center stack of radios was less than an inch too far to the right to be within the field of view.  We bought and installed an annunciator.  I'm too lazy to look up the reference right now.

Do I use it?  Rarely.  Does it work?  Yes.  If you don't have it and have an IFR accident will they notice?  Maybe.  Will they care?  Probably not unless having the wrong source selected was a contributing factor.

[cnoe]

If the installing shop (which has "Avionics" in their business name) signed off on it, there's a 337 on file for it, and the guy who does my transponder/pitot-static tests has no objections then I'm certainly not going to poke the sleeping bear by measuring the exact position of the VLOC indicator on my GNS.

I'd be willing to bet that if every single airplane were inspected spinner to tail with a fine-tooth comb (including documents and logs) then very few of us would be 100% legal. I "believe" I'm legal but then again somebody sometime might have put a pointy screw in my belly pan rather than a flat-point screw.

Just sayin'...

[Gary0747]

Was all this really this complicated back in the days people were installing and using Loran for IFR enroute and approaches?  How about the old ADF approach days?

Flight Manual supplements approved by FISDOs that are limited due to available time and people being reluctant to sign anything that might be cause for future second guessing in the case of an incident?

It seems like the FAA is not internally coordinated with all the current decomissioning of VORs and the expensive time consuming hurdles in place to get legacy TSOed GPS units approved even for enroute. 

The solution is to spend $12,000 for a new WAAS GPS that comes with a STC?

[Andy95W]

Most FSDOs look at AFMs for plain vanilla GPS systems as old hat by now. You may have to explain where the supplement came from and how it specifically applies to your airplane. 

If it came from a recognized source and it looks like everybody else's, it really isn't much of a problem- particularly if the avionics shop doing the work has been in the region for a while. 

[Gary0747]

f it came from a recognized source and it looks like everybody else's, it really isn't much of a problem- particularly if the avionics shop doing the work has been in the region for a while

 

This is not my experience. I have been waiting for over a year for an approval of a Garmin GNC 300XL coupled to a Sandel SN3308.  Granted two FMS are required and one would think it would be a straight forward approval.  Not sure if no one else is installing these legacy systems anymore but I think some FISDOs simply do not do FMS any more since the non legacy systems all have STCs

[Gary0747]

I raised this topic some time ago on Beech Talk and got some intersting response  

 

http://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=115708&view=unread#unread

[Andy95W]

In that case, it must be FSDO dependent (no surprise there).

Sorry you live in a FSDO region that is scared of its own shadow.

[kris_adams]

When I took my instrument checkride (~6 years ago), I had to show that my 430 was legally certified to fly ifr in the logs to both the examiner and the FSDO (I was fortunate to have the FSDO do the annual ride for the DE for my instrument checkride).  I do not have an external annunciator in my J.  They said it wasn't needed because the radio was within my field of view.  Legal or not?  Not sure, but the installer, DE, and FSDO (which wasn't where it was installed by the way) was good with it. 

Good luck on your search Glaifaille!

[glafaille]

I have examined the Flight Manual Supplement for the GPS in my plane.

It does say that it is an FAA approved flight manual supplement and it does list my aircraft make, model and serial number.  And it also lists the GPS by make and model.

It does say that it meets the requirements for IFR enroute, terminal and approaches.

Each page is signed and dated by the installer representing the Repair Station.  There is nothing anywhere signed by the FAA.

My gut feeling is I'm legal.  What do you guys think?