My GTN650 provides 1 comm and 1 nav. Pros/cons for getting 2nd comm? (Garmin GTR205 for instance).

[YuriE]

My relatively updated panel (GTN650, GFC500, dual G5s, GTX345) has only one comm/nav provided by GTN. I had outdated second comm before getting my GFC AP, and did not want to spend $$ on moving it around, thinking I'd rather get something nicer later.

Now, after flying like this for a year, I'm hesitant spending any more $$. Feel comfy as is, and carry handheld as a backup (which will have to do in any event in case of power failure). 

Any thoughts on what would justify another bundle of greens on 2nd comm?

[toto]

I wouldn’t put a second com radio high on my list. I use a GTN as primary and I have a KX-155 for secondary, but I haven’t spent much time worrying about upgrading the King radio. 

I’d worry first about failure modes for your attitude indicators (I believe you can use either G-5 for attitude if one fails), and then your nav source if the GTN craps out. Your handheld isn’t going to do all that much good unless you’re near an airport, but it’s the lowest of the three priorities, and it’s better than a light gun

 

[PeteMc]

When I upgraded my panel I put in a GNC355 as my backup GPS and Comm.  This way if the GTN dies, I have both GPS Nav and Comms without jumping through any major hoops.

 

[LANCECASPER]

On 10/11/2025 at 5:34 PM, YuriE said:

My relatively updated panel (GTN650, GFC500, dual G5s, GTX345) has only one comm/nav provided by GTN. I had outdated second comm before getting my GFC AP, and did not want to spend $$ on moving it around, thinking I'd rather get something nicer later.

Now, after flying like this for a year, I'm hesitant spending any more $$. Feel comfy as is, and carry handheld as a backup (which will have to do in any event in case of power failure). 

Any thoughts on what would justify another bundle of greens on 2nd comm?

A Trig Com* or Becker Com** would easily fit where the STec Autopilot used to be on the RIght side of your panel with an adapter plate***. Ideally if both of your radio have identical buttonology it might be a little more convenient, but in any event a 2nd panel radio to me is a must.

I carry a handheld but they are pretty worthless in reality to try to use in a complete NORDO situation, but better than nothing, especially if you have a complete electrical failure. A second com would only need to be used once when you really need it to be well worth it, however I think you'd end up using it to set up for every flight. 

 

* (https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/ty91vhfradio.php?clickkey=31904)

** (https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/beckerar6201.php?clickkey=31904)

*** (https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/inpages/mk641.php?clickkey=46985)

 - - -

If you want nav redundancy also, a trig nav/com with an on screen cdi isn't terribly expensive either, $4108.17 with a Spruce discount

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/trig_11-16838.php?clickkey=2691991

 

Or a Garmin is $4680 with a Spruce discount. 

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/garmin_gnc215.php?clickkey=10900

[Shadrach]

1 hour ago, toto said:

I wouldn’t put a second com radio high on my list. I use a GTN as primary and I have a KX-155 for secondary, but I haven’t spent much time worrying about upgrading the King radio. 

I’d worry first about failure modes for your attitude indicators (I believe you can use either G-5 for attitude if one fails), and then your nav source if the GTN craps out. Your handheld isn’t going to do all that much good unless you’re near an airport, but it’s the lowest of the three priorities, and it’s better than a light gun

 

Yes well that’s because there is little utility to be found in an “upgrade” over a 155.

 

[Shadrach]

I am surprised how many folks are minimizing the value of a second radio.
I fly a number of aircraft these days. The Decathlon has a single KY96 for a comm and I miss not having a second comm.  I like to preset all my frequencies at busy airports comm 1 - tower and STBY departure , comm 2 - clearance and STBY ground.  I like being able to get ATIS information when inbound without going off ATC freq.  Then there’s the redundancy aspect. If I wear the OP, I would definitely add a second radio.

[toto]

18 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Yes well that’s because there is little utility to be found in an “upgrade” over a 155.

 

I have a 165 in a box, just in case

 

[Shadrach]

Just now, toto said:

I have a 165 in a box, just in case

 

I like the 165 a lot.  Super reliable radio. The “pull to get radial” is a nice feature of the NAV, but it was way more meaningful before moving maps. With two 165s you can get instant triangulation of position without touching the OBS. 

[Ragsf15e]

Lots of IFR or mostly vfr?

[toto]

2 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

I like the 165 a lot.  Super reliable radio. The “pull to get radial” is a nice feature of the NAV, but it was way more meaningful before moving maps. With two 165s you can get instant triangulation of position without touching the OBS. 

My original panel had a 155 and a 165, and when I upgraded to the GTN, they pulled the 165 and left the 155 as the secondary. I’ve had zero problems with the 155, though I probably would have kept the 165 in the panel if I’d thought to ask.

[midlifeflyer]

I’m a fan of two comms. Like a number of pilots, I organize them based on whom I’m communicating with. And I like the convenience of being able to listen to AWOS/ATIS without going off comm frequency.  But I really like the ability to monitor the CTAF at my nontowered destination while still talking to ATC (both IFR and when getting flight following). I like the extra situational awareness that gives me. 

[Max Clark]

13 hours ago, YuriE said:

My relatively updated panel (GTN650, GFC500, dual G5s, GTX345) has only one comm/nav provided by GTN. I had outdated second comm before getting my GFC AP, and did not want to spend $$ on moving it around, thinking I'd rather get something nicer later.

Now, after flying like this for a year, I'm hesitant spending any more $$. Feel comfy as is, and carry handheld as a backup (which will have to do in any event in case of power failure). 

Any thoughts on what would justify another bundle of greens on 2nd comm?

Do you want to be talked in to, our out off getting a second comm?

2nd comm is really nice for a lot of things - backup, frequency management, being able to monitor ATIS/AWOS, easy flipping between the two, etc...

But you don't *need* it for what you're doing, and it's your money you're spending so you have to value it or feel like you're missing something now.

FWIW I put a GNC215 in my plane as a secondary NAV/COMM. I like having dual radios and my cockpit workflow takes advantage of it. I also like having the secondary NAV and keep a VOR dialed in as I fly.

[Aerodon]

I would put one of the 2.25" round comms in that spare space...

[YuriE]

20 hours ago, Ragsf15e said:

Lots of IFR or mostly vfr?

Got IFR just 3 months ago, but am already flying a good mix VFR/IFR...

[Ragsf15e]

10 minutes ago, YuriE said:

Got IFR just 3 months ago, but am already flying a good mix VFR/IFR...

Id probably find some way to put in at least one more comm then, a lot of people would consider a 2nd nav/comm just in case the 650 goes out, because you don’t have another way to shoot an approach and get down.

[YuriE]

16 hours ago, Ragsf15e said:

Id probably find some way to put in at least one more comm then, a lot of people would consider a 2nd nav/comm just in case the 650 goes out, because you don’t have another way to shoot an approach and get down.

How much $$ is it reasonable to continue pouring into over 60-year old plane? ;-) After GFC500 upgrade, which I find invaluable, I'm in the territory where 100% of further improvement expense is unrecoverable, vs typical 50%... Stacking that against the reason you gave is my challenge.

[47U]

On 10/11/2025 at 3:34 PM, YuriE said:

I'm hesitant spending any more $$. Feel comfy as is, and carry handheld as a backup (which will have to do in any event in case of power failure).

36 minutes ago, YuriE said:

I'm in the territory where 100% of further improvement expense is unrecoverable, vs typical 50%... Stacking that against the reason you gave is my challenge.

Your risk tolerance is what it is.  A lot of pilot’s wouldn’t feel comfortable with only a handheld as a backup comm.  The 650xi was released over 5 years ago so your 650 is at least that old.  Avionics are certainly more reliable today as compared to 50 years ago when 2 nav/comms, one with ILS, and a DME was very capable panel.  But, 5+ years in service is not a new radio.  

I think your reluctance to spend a few more amu’s because it won’t add value to the plane is debatable.  I think most buyers today expect 2 nav sources and 2 comms as minimum equipment and might discount your airplane because it lacks redundancy (of course, I might be wrong).  As a minimum, I think you need to add the second comm as @LANCECASPER posted links to possible choices, and if you’re relying on an iPad or handheld GPS for nav backup, or if your handheld comm also have nav capability, then that’s the choice in redundancy you’re made.  (You’ve got a nice panel, but I think the designer should have planned the layout to support an additional stack nav/comm and CDI, just my opinion.) 

[Ragsf15e]

4 hours ago, YuriE said:

How much $$ is it reasonable to continue pouring into over 60-year old plane? ;-) After GFC500 upgrade, which I find invaluable, I'm in the territory where 100% of further improvement expense is unrecoverable, vs typical 50%... Stacking that against the reason you gave is my challenge.

Here’s my three thoughts on this.

1. This isn’t an economic decision about value of the aircraft vs value of the improvements.  This one is about having a reasonable IFR backup for safety.

2. If you want to look at it from the standpoint of pour $$ into a 60 yo airplane, you could always buy a new one.  However, you get roughly the same performance and much more $$, but that alleviates your “60 yo” issue.

3.  As an owner, we can buy things we want for convenience or just because they’re cool.  No economic justification required.

 I do think 1 radio is fine if you’re strictly vfr.  If you’re ifr, I think you should have 2 radios and probably 2 separate ways to shoot an approach.  But to each their own.

[Utah20Gflyer]

Personally I like having two modern Comm radios so I can get ahead of things.   For instance at a busy airport you can have clearance, ground, tower and departure all ready to go.  If it were my plane I would definitely add a radio but would do so in the easiest way possible.   I would consider a comm radio that fits in a 3.125” instrument hole or another option would be an audio panel that has a Com radio such as the PS engineering PAR 200.  

[Pinecone]

2 hours ago, YuriE said:

How much $$ is it reasonable to continue pouring into over 60-year old plane? ;-) After GFC500 upgrade, which I find invaluable, I'm in the territory where 100% of further improvement expense is unrecoverable, vs typical 50%... Stacking that against the reason you gave is my challenge.

If you plan on selling, that is true.

But there is the joy of flying a nicely equipped airplane for the rest of the time you own it.

Airplanes are not investments.

[Pinecone]

55 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

Here’s my three thoughts on this.

1. This isn’t an economic decision about value of the aircraft vs value of the airplane.  This one is about having a reasonable IFR backup for safety.

2. If you want to look at it from the standpoint of pour $$ into a 60 yo airplane, you could always buy a new one.  However, you get roughly the same performance and much more $$, but that alleviates your “60 yo” issue.

3.  As an owner, we can buy things we want for convenience or just because they’re cool.  No economic justification required.

 I do think 1 radio is fine if you’re strictly vfr.  If you’re ifr, I think you should have 2 radios and probably 2 separate ways to shoot an approach.  But to each their own.

Agreed

[MikeOH]

I wouldn't fly IMC without both a second comm and VOR/ILS. GPS craps out and your iPAD is going to only be good for watching movies.  And, having to use my handheld in IMC to communicate with ATC is NOT a scenario I want to experience!

But, that's just me

[Vance Harral]

I wouldn't teach IFR in widespread low IMC in an aircraft with only one GTN-650 for navigation.  My concerns would be a combination of lack of redundancy, and the additional distraction of using a single flip-flop to juggle three COM frequencies during the transition from initial to final approach (weather, ARTCC/TRACON, Tower/CTAF).  Those concerns aren't show stoppers, but it would really detract from my enjoyment.

That said, lot of people with instrument ratings only fly "gentleman's IFR", i.e. mostly VMC with an occasional climb/descent through a thin layer well above the ground.  I'd fly with the OP in their airplane under those circumstances.

[YuriE]

On 10/13/2025 at 1:13 PM, Pinecone said:

If you plan on selling, that is true.

But there is the joy of flying a nicely equipped airplane for the rest of the time you own it.

Airplanes are not investments.

With you there! That's why I got GFC500... And even then I did weigh $$ vs benefit. Benefit is tremendous, and I'm glad I did it. There's no comparison to how I flew w/ my old S-Tec 40 and now. On the other hand - radio or GPS failure in my mind leads to immediate need of getting out of IMC as quickly as possible, and having ability to talk to tower or CTAF to land. Having secondary COM/GPS is very convenient in THAT EVENT, but does not really provide as high a guarantee as dual magnetos do for continued flight, for instance. Electrical failure risk remains, and it feels to me (perhaps incorrectly) it is likelier scenario than failures as seemingly narrow as radio/GPS (b/c alternator is mech device I guess?)... If I could have purely emergency cover for both that is also inexpensive - I would just continue enjoying failure free so far flying w/o large expense. Hence my hesitation. It is obvious, however, that options eval does continue in my mind! ;-) Itching to spend =) 

[YuriE]

23 hours ago, Vance Harral said:

I wouldn't teach IFR in widespread low IMC in an aircraft with only one GTN-650 for navigation.  My concerns would be a combination of lack of redundancy, and the additional distraction of using a single flip-flop to juggle three COM frequencies during the transition from initial to final approach (weather, ARTCC/TRACON, Tower/CTAF).  Those concerns aren't show stoppers, but it would really detract from my enjoyment.

That said, lot of people with instrument ratings only fly "gentleman's IFR", i.e. mostly VMC with an occasional climb/descent through a thin layer well above the ground.  I'd fly with the OP in their airplane under those circumstances.

Bull's eye! I'm one of those g IFR flyers, with just a few months of IFR rating... :-) Thank you for advice!

Edited October 14, 2025 by YuriE