Avionics Upgrade for the 310

[Ted]

On Friday I picked up the 310 from the avionics shop. We'd had them replace the #2 Nav/Com with a 430W, install a WX-500 StormScope, do a pitot/stat/transponder check, a cooling fan for the avionics, and look into an issue I'd been having with the Aspen's compass not lining up with the magnetic compass. Twin Lakes Avionics (at 8A7) did the Aspen install on our plane about 18 months ago, and did an excellent job when they did, providing a great panel setup and also removing 65 lbs (literally) worth of unused/broken avionics. They also donated the labor portion of the install on the Aspen, for which we have been very grateful. I wanted to return to give them some paid business to say thanks.

We'd decided to add the 430W to the plane (which has a 530W) to provide a second GPS, second display for nav/stormscope/terrain data, and second glide slope. The 530W made for a single point of failure for a number of key features, which we didn't like with the sort of flying we do. The WX-500 compliments the on-board radar for detecting lightning, and after the Aspen failure, I started paying more attention to heat generation and noticed that there's a significant amount back there that I wanted to address. Then there's that annoying pitot-stat check that comes due every two years.

I can be a bit of a tough customer, at least that's what avionics shops have told me. Every time I've gone to one I've gotten annoyed at them for expanding workscope without authorization (which I don't mind until it literally doubles the cost of the bill), being unable to get the plane done anywhere close to the quoted time, and also being unable to follow work instructions. Twin Lakes did stick to the workscope, but also didn't try to oversell me. If anything, they tried to talk me out of the expense of adding a cooling fan, to which I said "Well, it won't hurt anything, and I want it in."

In this case, the work was done ahead of schedule if anything. They said it would take 2-3 weeks to do the work, and I asked that they do it in 2 weeks if possible as I had to be down in the North Carolina area for work purposes and it would save me a trip if I could fly it home. Robbie made no promises, but said they'd try. They were able to get it done on time, including getting all the tests and paperwork completed. No test flight - I'm not sure if they will fly it or not, but I don't let anyone else fly the plane.

In addition to getting the requested work completed, they also updated the firmware on the 530W already installed, updated the firmware on the Aspen, and noticed an intermittent problem I'd forgotten to mention where the 530W would throw an error code on start occasionally, which was fixed by resetting the unit. They also attached the transponder to the Aspen's altitude encoder. While not necessary, the benefit this has is that if the backup altimeter goes out, we can replace it with a non-encoding unit (i.e. much cheaper).

Some people asked why I was taking the plane to a shop around 300 nm away when there are obviously closer shops. This makes the 4th avionics shop I've been to (excluding autopilot work), and the only one that's done good quality work, meeting quoted price, on or ahead of schedule, and met or exceeded my expectations.

The test flight home showed no issues after shooting an LNAV/VNAV and ILS approach using the 430W and then flying home, and I'm very happy with the new setup. Looking forward to flying it more.

 

[Ted]

Here's a shot of the panel from the flight home.

 

[jmp470]

Why MPH? Nice set up, BTW

 

[HPNPilot1200]

Looks nice, Ted!

 

[N747JB]

Why MPH? Nice set up, BTW

That's the way mine is too, it's the way the original airspeed indicator and the POH is based on MPH. Plus it looks like your going faster!!
Nice headwind in the picture!

 

[LDJones]

I don't know, Ted. Do you think you can actually find your way through the clouds with that spartan panel??? I'm worried for you.

 

[wabower]

Yeah, but most of us don't believe it.

That's the way mine is too, it's the way the original airspeed indicator and the POH is based on MPH. Plus it looks like your going faster!!

 

[pbramlett]

Picture is a bit small

But it looks like a great panel.

 

[wabower]

Picture is a bit small for an interstate bill-board

But it looks like a great panel.

FTFY

 

[Ted]

Why MPH? Nice set up, BTW

She's an old bird - 1968. Certified in MPH so the Aspen has to display that. The factory ASI shows MPH on the outer ring and KTS on the inner ring.

And thanks.

 

[Ted]

Nice headwind in the picture!

Thanks!

My friends with a Cherokee were kind enough to give me a ride out. The funny part was that with a tailwind home (for them) they were getting the same GS as I was with the headwind.

 

[Alexb2000]

Ted-

Do you have GPSS on the Century 3?

Nice setup, I like that gunslinger. Is that a warning for someone in the right seat not to touch anything?

 

[Ted]

Ted-

Do you have GPSS on the Century 3?

Nice setup, I like that gunslinger. Is that a warning for someone in the right seat not to touch anything?

The Aspen has GPSS and will feed the Century III. It works well, I just didn't have it on in that picture. Flies holding patterns and all that. I prefer to hand fly them, thoigh - more fun.

I never thought of that use for the gunslinger, but I'll have to remember that! He was put there by the previous owner of the plane about 15 years ago. I liked having him there, so he's since stayed.

By the way, for those not familiar with the Aspen, the left of the center gray bar has TAS on the top (213 MPH) and GS below it. Then the Garmins show GS and headwind.

 

[jason]

Thanks!

My friends with a Cherokee were kind enough to give me a ride out. The funny part was that with a tailwind home (for them) they were getting the same GS as I was with the headwind.

At 1/3 the fuel burn.

 

[jason]

Nice panel, Ted. I'd love to be flying behind one just like it some day.

 

[Ted]

At 1/3 the fuel burn.

Not quite. They do 10 GPH to our 26.

Nice panel, Ted. I'd love to be flying behind one just like it some day.

Thanks, we're glad to have gotten to this point panel wise. While not completely necessary for flight, it does add to safety and provide some extra options and redundancy.

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

I wonder if all the good folks donating money to save these poor dogs know how you are spending their money?

 

[Ted]

I wonder if all the good folks donating money to save these poor dogs know how you are spending their money?

What makes you think it was their money?

 

[Marauder]

I absolutely love my Aspen setup. I have read the manuals a number of times and still find tidbits of information. My only challenge has been getting used to flying the tapes instead of the steam gauges. Hard habit to break!

 

[Ted]

I absolutely love my Aspen setup. I have read the manuals a number of times and still find tidbits of information. My only challenge has been getting used to flying the tapes instead of the steam gauges. Hard habit to break!]

The previous owner of this 310 who now owns a T310R with an Aspen has made the same comment, and I agree. When I'm doing my quick glances during takeoff or on short final, I definitely am looking at the steam gauge rather than the tape.

We considered adding a second Aspen, especially after my failure on the Belize trip. The 430 made the most sense since we lacked a second GS and when we go way up north, GPS is all you've got for nav.

 

[Marauder]

The previous owner of this 310 who now owns a T310R with an Aspen has made the same comment, and I agree. When I'm doing my quick glances during takeoff or on short final, I definitely am looking at the steam gauge rather than the tape.

We considered adding a second Aspen, especially after my failure on the Belize trip. The 430 made the most sense since we lacked a second GS and when we go way up north, GPS is all you've got for nav.

I'm sure I will eventually get comfortable with the numeric display -- the numbers are staring me right in the face!

If you go the Aspen MFD path, check out the AP redundancy capability that you can now get. Aspen provided the schematics to my avionics shop to build a switch to move the AP functionality over from the PFD to the MFD during reversion (for those without Aspens, it is the act of moving your flight information from the PFD to the MFD during a PFD failure) .

Here is the picture of the switch.

 

[dukeblue219]

Do you have the Aspen synthetic vision activated? Considering it?

 

[Ted]

Do you have the Aspen synthetic vision activated? Considering it?

We don't have it in this plane, but are considering it. The 310's previous owner has it in his T310R and does like it. I've never flown with it, neither has my wife. We both see the potential safety benefit, which is the real motivation behind these upgrades.

We're done with upgrades for the moment, but in another year or two we might go for it. I'm planning on leaving the 430 on the terrain page during normal flight, which provides similar information. After I get some flight time in, I'll see what I think of it.

 

[Marauder]

Do you have the Aspen synthetic vision activated? Considering it?

We don't have it in this plane, but are considering it. The 310's previous owner has it in his T310R and does like it. I've never flown with it, neither has my wife. We both see the potential safety benefit, which is the real motivation behind these upgrades.

We're done with upgrades for the moment, but in another year or two we might go for it. I'm planning on leaving the 430 on the terrain page during normal flight, which provides similar information. After I get some flight time in, I'll see what I think of it.

There is one pilot at my airport (Mid Atlantic area) who owns it and I have flown with him. I think the biggest advantage is for those who routinely fly in higher terrain elevations. I can see an advantage as well near airports where windmills keep showing up near airports.

What I did like about it was shooting an approach down to mins with him and watching the runway show up on the MFD as we were coming in. That was pretty neat. But not neat enough that I would trust it!

I wish it wasn't so expensive. I think list is $2,995 and they occassionally run rebates on it for $500. My pain threshold is $1,500 for it. I might reconsider if I moved to the hills.

 

[Ted]

The cost is a deterrant for sure, and I don't know whether it will go down or up with time. Either way, our threshold for pain right now is $0.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I absolutely love my Aspen setup. I have read the manuals a number of times and still find tidbits of information. My only challenge has been getting used to flying the tapes instead of the steam gauges. Hard habit to break!

What kind of plane is that? It looks at first glance like it's a single with 164 gallons/side fuel capacity!

 

[Marauder]

What kind of plane is that? It looks at first glance like it's a single with 164 gallons/side fuel capacity!

LOL! If it were 164 gallons per side, it would be a drone and I would need to fly it from the ground because all of my useful load was eaten up by fuel! It is a Mooney with bladders. 164 pounds per side.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

LOL! If it were 164 gallons per side, it would be a drone and I would need to fly it from the ground because all of my useful load was eaten up by fuel! It is a Mooney with bladders. 164 pounds per side.

Wow. That makes it the first avgas-powered plane I've seen that's marked in pounds!

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

What makes you think it was their money?

Are you saying you use your own personal money to put new engines and avionics in the corporate airplane or is that yours too?

So then what you lease your plane to the corporation instead?

 

[Ted]

Wow. That makes it the first avgas-powered plane I've seen that's marked in pounds!

The 310Rs are marked in pounds as well.

 

[Ted]

Are you saying you use your own personal money to put new engines and avionics in the corporate airplane or is that yours too?

So then what you lease your plane to the corporation instead?

Look up the ownership of the 310, and you'll see it's owned by Cloud Nine Rescue Flights. So it's not mine. Hence why I refer to it as "the 310" or "the 310 I fly." I may slip up and call it mine now and then, but not intentionally, and I don't view it that way, even though others do. But to clear up confusion, there isn't any problem with a non-profit renting an asset, including from a board member. My Aztec used to be rented by Cloud Nine at a rate that was consistently less than the actual operating costs, and left me consistently subsidizing the plane. I intentionally didn't want Cloud Nine to risk having costs it could not pay, which put the burden instead on me. The 310 being a donated asset belongs directly to Cloud Nine.

You asked if the donors know what their money is spent on. Probably not, because most of them likely assume that Cloud Nine has paid staff. We don't. Nobody gets paid, not even me. Well, the A&Ps do get paid for the work they do, but they do discount it. The donors probably also don't know that I pay for any personal flights I do out of pocket, at a rate that is consistently higher than our actual costs and if anything higher than what you'd expect to rent a 310 for elsewhere, but also makes sure that am no time do I risk taking advantage of the non-profit or have the appearance of such. So I'm a professional pilot that doesn't get paid, and also runs a non-profit corporation for free, which at one time was a 60 hour per week job on top of my day job. Free time? What's that? But I do get insulting comments and insinuations from people who think the cause is stupid or that clearly anyone who starts a non-profit can only be trying to steal or misuse funding from what few donors we can find.

So, where did the money come from? Well, to be honest it's none of your business. But we didn't have anywhere close to enough in the bank account to pay for the engine overhauls or the avionics upgrade, and there was no loan taken out to cover it, and no money owed to me or anyone else, not even in the form of flight hour credits. But my wallet is lighter. I'll let you do the math.

 

[DavidWhite]

Wow. That makes it the first avgas-powered plane I've seen that's marked in pounds!

My mooney is also marked in pounds

 

[Marauder]

My mooney is also marked in pounds

Don't know about you, but it makes me feel like I am getting more for my money when I fill up! Nothing like putting in $234 for 240 pounds of fuel. Much better than paying $234 for 40 gallons!

 

[EdFred]

Don't know about you, but it makes me feel like I am getting more for my money when I fill up! Nothing like putting in $234 for 240 pounds of fuel. Much better than paying $234 for 40 gallons!

Till ya run the miles/pound calculations.

 

[gismo]

The 310Rs are marked in pounds as well.

Even though they actually indicate volume not weight (and not all that accurately either IIRC).

 

[gismo]

But my wallet is lighter. I'll let you do the math.

"Doing the math" on aircraft ownership and operating costs is generally a bad idea.

 

[Ted]

Even though they actually indicate volume not weight (and not all that accurately either IIRC).

I'm pretty sure you're right. As I understand it, the 310Rs have the same fuel level indicators that the earlier Twin Cessnas did, so they just put the gauge in pounds. It throws me off when I fly a 310R, but is simple math.

By comparison, the Commander 690A has its fuel gauge in pounds, and actually does measure pounds.

"Doing the math" on aircraft ownership and operating costs is generally a bad idea.

A smart man.

 

[Marauder]

Till ya run the miles/pound calculations.

I'm happy staying just with the pounds to dollars math the other math makes me cry...

 

[Alexb2000]

Ted-

Knowing the kind of flying you do, have you ever considered a radar altimeter? I used to really want one, but now with GPS mapping so accurate, I'm not so sure. Of course it would be a nice double check that the guys in the 1900 in Alaska sure could have used.

 

[Ted]

Ted-

Knowing the kind of flying you do, have you ever considered a radar altimeter? I used to really want one, but now with GPS mapping so accurate, I'm not so sure. Of course it would be a nice double check that the guys in the 1900 in Alaska sure could have used.

It's funny you should mention that. The plane actually has a Bonzer Mini-Mark radar altimeter that doesn't give me any believeable numbers, came with the plane. I've been wanting to fix it, but haven't yet had it as a high priority due to other costs. If I can find some NOS parts on eBay I might go for it and see if that makes it work better.

Laurie and I would like it. Her SAR/transport category flight experience probably makes her more interested in it than me. I'm mostly interested in it for use on approach rather than en route.

If en route I can see some benefits. Early GPWS worked off of the radalt, so that would be useful to have it start flashing if I get below 1,000 AGL on an en-route phase. On the other hand, the 430/530W have terrain awareness built in that I can see on a 360 degree view out to 50 nm. It is based on a database, but also probably gives me more useful information on what direction I'll hit vs what direction to not hit. SV would also be good here.

If the plane didn't already have one installed, I doubt we'd consider buying and installing one. But since there is one, we might try to just replace the broken parts. That's also low on the priority list.