I could be wrong, but I thought the 430/530 series came with blanket permission approval in the install manual?
Total disappointment with 4 local avionics shops
- Thread starter beechcraft flyer
- Start date
rotormatic1
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2020
- Messages
- 143
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotormatic1
if you can get a copy of the manual..
For some reason can't get nothing to link... but just checked the Garmin site and the available 400/500 series install manuals have the permission in the Appendix.
jrcox19
Pre-takeoff checklist
Yep exactly.
The GTN manual, by contrast, basically says to go get the separate permission letter from the dealer system.
rotormatic1
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2020
- Messages
- 143
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotormatic1
I thought only dealers had access to install manuals for 400 and 500 series,..
Thats what I thought. But recently helped a friend research out a number of upgrades and found Garmin and others had manuals and permissions online for anyone. Seems as newer models came out the older stuff was recycled and made public. Works for me. For reference here is the 500W series with permission in Appx B.
https://static.garmin.com/pumac/GNS530W_InstallationManual_190-00357-02_.pdf
clarkmueller
Pre-Flight
I would enthusiastically encourage anyone to work with Aerial Avionics, although I haven’t been in touch with them in a few years (before they left RHV). In 2018, they installed a G500 TXi 1060 PFD + 700 EIS + GTN 750/650, an STEC 3100, and all the remote boxes for me for my T210N. I went from a round gage panel circa ~2000 or so, and it was a complete gut of the airplane. They are a pleasure to work with. My timing was kind of odd, because Garmin had *just* introduced the G500 TXi, and hadn’t quite figured everything out yet. But the quality of the work when I flew away was top notch. Outside of doing the odd software update and the usual inspections, I have had zero problems with any of their work in 5 years, and that is more than I can say for any other part of my airplane.
I’ve also had nothing but great experiences with LAC Avionics at SJC, although their overhead is crazy — you’re not going to go there and save a bunch of money versus shops that are in cheaper COL areas.
I’ve had positive experiences with San Luis Avionics at SBP and found their pricing to be good and their work to be solid, but it’s been very limited in number.
Garmin was one of the first if not the first to play the STC game in protectionist avionics and instruments. Azzhats.
Jpi does the same. A 900 nails you with $500 for an stc update. I’d rather send my money to EI (and do) any day.
You’re already paying inflated priced for their FAA certification - the electronics in a 650/750 are not very costly. An stc on top of that? Eat a hairy bag of phalluses.
I’d rather buy a ps engineering audio panel any day over garmin, a tx56a radio over a GNC, or a Freeflight ADSB device over a 345r. Heck I’d rather get an Avidyne GPS over a garmin.
I purchased a used GDL82 for $700 a week ago; I think i paid $700 for a GDL 84 last week as well, and $100 for a Freeflight 110. I wholeheartedly believe that not everyone wants to keep up with the joneses (and shouldn’t).
Much as we may love ADSB, garmin’s predatory practices made things mandatory which artificially created a solution for a problem that didn’t exist, and predatory anticompetitive practices inflated prices the same way that Tesla has inflated MSRP costs across other brands. Shame on them. If I can help a used market grow or help teach others how to self install, as Ed Haywood has outlined, I’ll gladly do it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Jpi does the same. A 900 nails you with $500 for an stc update. I’d rather send my money to EI (and do) any day.
You’re already paying inflated priced for their FAA certification - the electronics in a 650/750 are not very costly. An stc on top of that? Eat a hairy bag of phalluses.
I’d rather buy a ps engineering audio panel any day over garmin, a tx56a radio over a GNC, or a Freeflight ADSB device over a 345r. Heck I’d rather get an Avidyne GPS over a garmin.
I purchased a used GDL82 for $700 a week ago; I think i paid $700 for a GDL 84 last week as well, and $100 for a Freeflight 110. I wholeheartedly believe that not everyone wants to keep up with the joneses (and shouldn’t).
Much as we may love ADSB, garmin’s predatory practices made things mandatory which artificially created a solution for a problem that didn’t exist, and predatory anticompetitive practices inflated prices the same way that Tesla has inflated MSRP costs across other brands. Shame on them. If I can help a used market grow or help teach others how to self install, as Ed Haywood has outlined, I’ll gladly do it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ed Haywood
En-Route
An A&P/IA who automatically defaults to "everything is a major" is one I would like to stay away from.
Appendix A to Part 43 is silent on specific avionics and instrument major alterations. In the "appliances" section it does say: "In addition, changes in the basic design of radio communication and navigation equipment approved under type certification or a Technical Standard Order that have an effect on frequency stability, noise level, sensitivity, selectivity, distortion, spurious radiation, AVC characteristics, or ability to meet environmental test conditions and other changes that have an effect on the performance of the equipment are also major alterations."
Appendix A to Part 43 is silent on specific avionics and instrument major alterations. In the "appliances" section it does say: "In addition, changes in the basic design of radio communication and navigation equipment approved under type certification or a Technical Standard Order that have an effect on frequency stability, noise level, sensitivity, selectivity, distortion, spurious radiation, AVC characteristics, or ability to meet environmental test conditions and other changes that have an effect on the performance of the equipment are also major alterations."
Ed Haywood
En-Route
What is the source for this? Not asking to argue, am trying to get smarter on sources of guidance.
Not really. The major guidance points to changes of the basic system and not the individual parts of the system.
FYI: an appliance is an item which is not part of an airframe, engine, or prop. For example, if you want to alter the display screen on a Garmin 430 that would be an appliance alteration.
In very general terms, an IFR GPS "interacts" with the NAS and/or ground based equipment for the purpose of navigation. That interaction requires the approved data. A VFR GPS does not and requires the VFR only placard even though it might be able to interact as well. If that makes sense to you.
Ventucky Red
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 2,179
- Display Name
Display name:
Jon
There is a guy at KOXR... Jay or I think Jeff Odum... I'll try and find his number, but folks tell me he is reasonable and does good work.. There is also High Desert at Fox Field.. lots of the KCMA piots highly recommend him
www.highdesertavionics.com
Like others mentioned, why are you installing a "used" unit that may be obsolete pretty soon? For a few bucks more there are the Garmin 175 and 335
Ed Haywood
En-Route
It does make sense, thanks. But my specific question is about the actual source of that information. How does the FAA publish or communicate such interpretations, and where would an installer need to research in order to learn it?
The FAA uses ACs, Orders, and Policy Memos to communicate that info to the installer side. And same to the producer side but includes TSOs. For GPS install approvals a common one is AC 20-138(x).
Ed Haywood
En-Route
Thanks, learned a lot from that. Seems like the main FAA concern is with the consequences of failure, which are critical in IFR but minor in VFR. That makes sense.
So let's say I have a widget in my plane and I want to replace it with another widget which is similar, but which is not listed as an option in the TC spec sheet. My installer goes through the flowchart in the AC (I forget which one, you gave it to me) and concludes it is a minor. Is there a way to search for more specific AC's, orders, or policy memos to make sure the FAA did not previously do the analysis and concluded differently?
jrcox19
Pre-takeoff checklist
AC 20-138 covers the GPS question specifically
camorton
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2018
- Messages
- 240
- Display Name
Display name:
Craig Morton
This.
Been going this route on my planes for years. Haven't let the smoke out of a box yet. Starting to actually enjoy it. Very satisfying. I work slow, so it is time consuming. But a lot less dirty than working on the engine.
C.
rotormatic1
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2020
- Messages
- 143
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotormatic1
Faa Order 8300.16 addresses VFR GPS minor installations…
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_pol...fm/go/document.information/documentid/1035210
from page 6-3:
g. Conditions to Consider an Alteration Minor. If all of the following conditions are met, an AFMS/RFMS is not required. For certain systems such as Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) for visual flight rules (VFR) use only, the alteration may be considered minor and FAA Form 337 is not required:
(1) Does not restrict, displace, or limit the use of required equipment.
(2) All new limitations can be addressed via placards;
(3) The aircraft performance is not negatively affected;
(4) Does not require a placard per TC or STC;
(5) VFR use only; and
(6) Is nonrequired equipment (refer to AC 20-138, Airworthiness Approval of Positioning and Navigation Systems).
h. VFR Operations. For equipment limited to VFR, a readable placard must be installed in clear view of the pilot stating that the equipment is only to be used for VFR operations, unless the equipment automatically displays this message on startup and pilot action is required to clear the message. An AFMS/RFMS is not required since the placard or display contains the equipment limitation.
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_pol...fm/go/document.information/documentid/1035210
from page 6-3:
g. Conditions to Consider an Alteration Minor. If all of the following conditions are met, an AFMS/RFMS is not required. For certain systems such as Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) for visual flight rules (VFR) use only, the alteration may be considered minor and FAA Form 337 is not required:
(1) Does not restrict, displace, or limit the use of required equipment.
(2) All new limitations can be addressed via placards;
(3) The aircraft performance is not negatively affected;
(4) Does not require a placard per TC or STC;
(5) VFR use only; and
(6) Is nonrequired equipment (refer to AC 20-138, Airworthiness Approval of Positioning and Navigation Systems).
h. VFR Operations. For equipment limited to VFR, a readable placard must be installed in clear view of the pilot stating that the equipment is only to be used for VFR operations, unless the equipment automatically displays this message on startup and pilot action is required to clear the message. An AFMS/RFMS is not required since the placard or display contains the equipment limitation.
Its more the the error limits for IFR than failure. There are international standards on error rates.
AC 43.210
Too general a question. Each installation usually has its own route to follow for additional guidance.
Last edited: