Build My Panel!

[jax88]

Here's your chance to spend someone else's money!  Build my panel for me!

I'm taking my 75F with electric flaps and electric gear in for annual in April and I may be able to swing a panel upgrade this year.  I'd like to solicit opinions and ideas about what I should have in my panel.  Here are some details:

- I'm not in awe of something just because it is the latest and greatest.

- My flying has and will probably always be limited to VFR or light IFR.

- My manual navigation skills are very good.

- I would like the ability to fly at optimum engine settings at all flight levels and conditions.

- Functionality and reliability are more important to me than "whiz-bang".

- I would like to wind up with a panel that is flexible enough to meet upcoming regulations.

 

My panel currently has 2 TKM nav/coms one with glideslope one without, a Garmin 496, a PM 1000 II intercom, a KMA 20 audio panel, a KT76A transponder, a WX10A StormScope, and a Century 41 autopilot.  Anything that makes sense to keep, should be kept.

Spend my money!

[Cruiser]

based on your statements you have everything you need, don't waste your money. The only needed/functional thing you have not mentioned is an engine monitor. IF you don't have one consider one of the primary instrument replacement units such as the TSO's and STC'd JPI EDM 930 or similar.

[sleepingsquirrel]

I think that your panel could only be enhanced by looking into these items:

A. Proprietary covering designed to reflect odd harmonic light frequencies to reduce non-linear photon radiation interference.  Available in leather,wood grain, or krinkle coat

B.Time warp compression/expansion to synchronize Here/There time coordinates.

C. Independent power & glory switches. These are just a novelty item (stick on, surface mount) I use the power switch for takeoff and the glory switch for landing.

I personally like versitility of the time warp synchronizer. (Can only be installed in a Mooney by an authorized service center)

These items are available through the RANE Corporation, copyright material 1992

 

[jlunseth]

Quote: jax88

- I'm not in awe of something just because it is the latest and greatest.

- My flying has and will probably always be limited to VFR or light IFR.

- My manual navigation skills are very good.

- I would like the ability to fly at optimum engine settings at all flight levels and conditions.

- Functionality and reliability are more important to me than "whiz-bang".

- I would like to wind up with a panel that is flexible enough to meet upcoming regulations. 

Here is my .02.

The best thing you can do for yourself from a navigational standpoint is to have a good GPS and moving map, or a unit that combines the two readably such as the 530W.  The best thing you can do from the standpoint of managing the engine and fuel, particularly in emergencies, is to get all the factory engine gauges out of your plane and put in a unit such as the JPI 930 or the comparable EI, that consolidates all of it in one readout. 

You already have the handheld GPS, so maybe that is good enough for you for nav.  I personally prefer something more robust, panel mounted, so that you can do GPS approaches legally. 

The factory engine gauges to me are just a mess, especially on the older planes.  The engine strip gauges for various temps and pressures are no well lit, the bulbs are usually burned out, and they are up underneatht the glare shield.  You have to make an affirmative effort to read them, so if something is going wrong it does not stick out.  In addition, having the MP and RPM's and/or EGT over on the co-pilot side is not very useful.  You can get rid of all of those with an integral unit, and probably actually save some panel space because you can take out all of those junky gauges as long as you get an integral unit that is STC's as primary for the engine functions.  in addition, these units include an engine monitor that will allow you to see what is going on with each cylinder, and much better fuel flow and fuel tank readings than factory, and all this will be in one place. 

What I did was to get the 930, and I put it in the panel on the pilot's side, to the right of the six pack.  I kept all my traditional six pack instruments, the glass panel stuff is nice, but it just provides the same functionality as the steam gauges, but in an electronic display. 

Lastly, if you get a moving map or 530 you should strongly consider Sat. wx.  I find it invaluable for long cross country trips.  You can see the weather ahead of you, out as far as 100 nm, and make plans accordingly.

[Parker_Woodruff]

GNS430W.

If you want to further sell everything off, get an SL30 navcomm.

[rob]

I had a 430 and SL30 combo installed this summer, along with an Aspen. This is in a 65C. I absolutely love the Garmin Radios - especially when paired with the Aera, which feeds info to the SL30, and the FP5L from Electronics International, which feeds fuel info to the 430.

[KSMooniac]

My choice would be an engine monitor with fuel option, 530W, SL30, Air Gizmo dock for the 496 (if you don't have that already), GPSS module, GMA340 or PS Engineering audio panel/intercom with aux input in approximate order of preference.  I'd keep the KT76A and C41 as long as they were still working.

[jlunseth]

GPSS is nice, of course you have to have the panel mounted GPS to take advantage of it.  Bear in mind that GPSS is built into the Aspens so if you buy a good GPSS you are about half way to an Aspen.

[jax88]

Obviously some of my avionics are dated, and I've had some minor issues with the TKM radios, but everything DOES function.  In past discussions with my local avionics shop (happens to be my FBO as well), I've been advised to leave well enough alone.  Their two main arguments for retaining the existing avionics have been that my current equipment meets my needs and the newer, digital equipment comes with its own set of drawbacks (displays go bad, more complex repair).  In my more frugal moments I have tended to agree with them.

I haven't started work on my instrument rating, but I intend to do so this year.  One concern I have about my avionics is my ability to use instrument approaches at ALL airfields.  Without a certified gps, can I make instrument approaches to fields that only offer gps approaches?  I thought I had read somewhere that VOR and/or ILS approaches could be phased out as satellite/gps technology advances, and I wouldn't want to be "locked out" of using any field.  Of course, I don't suppose there is any harm in waiting until the need arises to equip my aircraft accordingly.

[Cruiser]

Quote: jax88

snip.....

I haven't started work on my instrument rating, but I intend to do so this year.  One concern I have about my avionics is my ability to use instrument approaches at ALL airfields.  Without a certified gps, can I make instrument approaches to fields that only offer gps approaches?  I thought I had read somewhere that VOR and/or ILS approaches could be phased out as satellite/gps technology advances, and I wouldn't want to be "locked out" of using any field.  Of course, I don't suppose there is any harm in waiting until the need arises to equip my aircraft accordingly.

[Parker_Woodruff]

You need a GPS to make a GPS approach.  It has to be IFR certified in your plane.

With an IFR GPS/NAV/COMM there are very few approaches you CAN'T do.  Go try to fly into Olney (ONY) on an IFR day without GPS.  I'll tell you about getting vectored around just to find a hole to pop through for a visual approach.  I got a 430W then it wasn't a problem.

Let me know if you want to do some IFR flying.  My evenings after work don't have much going on.

[DaV8or]

As long as everything is working OK... then ditch the nav/com without glideslope, add a GNS 430W and a JPI 830 or simailar and you are done.

[aerobat95]

I would ditch the two nav/coms that you have and replace with a 430W and a SL30 then add a JPI 930 and ditch all the engine instruments. 

[aerobat95]

Oh and add a Garmin or PS Engineering audio panel and a digital transponder.....

[jax88]

Not sure it's gonna happen now.  I can pour $30-$50k into it to upgrade the avionics, add an engine monitor, and replace the front seats (co-pilot wants something with a headrest).  In the end, it is still just a 140 knot aircraft.  When I consider that my total investment would then be approaching $110k, I begin to wonder if I shouldn't just trade up instead.

[carusoam]

I went with trade-up....

It did not make financial sense to continue to put money into the plane that no longer fit my mission.

co-pilot likes the headrests.....even though they could have been added at a much lower price....

-a-

[jax88]

Leaning that way, trading up that is.  Beating myself up over it though.  The '75F was everything I had hoped it would be for the year I've had it, so much so that I wouldn't hesitate to spend more on a on a newer, faster Mooney.

[KSMooniac]

Tough call on the trade-up.  How long are your typical trips?  Run some sample flight plans and see if a J will really save a lot of time vs. your F.  Consider if you've gotten your F up to your specs mechanically, ie squawk-free and dependable vs. the unknowns of the next plane.  Are there many J's on the market currently that are already equipped like you wish, or would have you to upgrade the next one too?  Tank condition?  

I'm just throwing out some of those factors to see if you need to include them in the overall transaction cost if your F is already in great shape.  IMO, the speed delta won't make a huge difference relative to the cost unless you start thinking about an Ovation, which of course double the budget and increases fuel burn by ~50%.  If your F has some other issues that have been deferred, then perhaps trading up might be the wiser choice, especially if you can find one equipped like you wish and let the last owner eat the upgrade cost.  The K's have dropped a lot in price over the last 5 years (since I first started shopping) to make them attractive as well IMO.  

[jax88]

My current F is wonderful, not without its peculiarities, but is a joy to fly and always dependable.  Co-pilot wife wants new seats, I want new avionics.  My flying is mostly cross country, 6 - 7 hour trips.  The J model should lop an hour off those travel times, and a K could take another half hour off the times.  Nothing to sneeze at.

At least I'm in a good position as a potential buyer: current buyer's market and I already have a good aircraft I can use until the perfect match comes along.

[John Pleisse]

Our planes have 14v electric, one electric buss, one alternator, one battery and we operate 100 degres ROP. I'd do a Garmin 430W and an Aspen Pro. Keep your XM enabled 496. It is very good. You would spend less than $26k (installed). You'd be WAAS enabled, you'd double your redundancy, you'd put your very decent autopilot to better use and maintain the aircraft's originally designed systems. You'd have a lot more fun flying safer and for the next 5 years, you'd probably get 45 cents/ per dollar back if you sold it. What's not to like?

[KSMooniac]

If your trips are that long, I would certainly be considering a K if you're willing to deal with O2 use so you can get up high where the K really shines.  It definitely is a buyer's market and if you can be ready to purchase before selling yours then that would be a great possibility to wait until your perfect plane is available, then sell your F.  It does make more sense to put $30-40k of avionics into an airframe that is worth more, or at least as much sense as any of us can make with this ownership game.    Best scenario would be to pay more for the next one and get it equipped with as much as possible and let the previous owner eat the upgrade cost.  Having time on your side is a great thing...

[aerobat95]

What sort of speed are you flight planning for?  I am seeing right at 148kts on a very regular basis with my '74F....I believe that real world numbers for a J are around 155kts?  J owners might be able to shine some light on that.  So for me if I were to fly a 1000nm trip it would take around 6.8 hrs and a J would do it in 6.4 hrs....There is a MAPA article that says the F will do 90% of what a J will do for 30-50K less.  Just a thought....Now the J's are a pretty sexy looking airplane, but you can always put a 201 style windshield and some speed mods and basically have something pretty close.

[jax88]

The J wouldn't be so much for a speed upgrade as it would be for the avionics upgrade and interior upgrade.  It could be a tough, long wait while I watch for the perfect J to become available, but I'm okay with that.  I've got money in hand and I already have a very servicable aircraft.  Because of where I think I'll be professionally in a couple of years, I may need to look toward the K model, something with more speed to get to and from Texas to either coast and back.

[aerobat95]

Got ya....the K's are nice and pretty reasonable now....

[jax88]

K's certainly offer more speed and the ability to get up high and take advantage of any helping winds . . . but . . . the maintenance cost . . . yikes!  $40,000 overhauls, and they come around quicker, . . .   I don't know.  Should be an interesting couple weeks/months figuring out which direction to go and then finding an aircraft.