Certified vs Non certified IFR avionics (VFR/IFR Robin) - whats the difference?

I am puzzled as to where the original topic relates to a Robin.

Do they offer Robins with VFR avionics?

At the price, it would amaze me.

I think Neal might have a GNS430 in the TB panel. If there is no AFMS which authorities approaches, then it is not legal for GPS approaches.

However if you use it to fly say an NDB approach that is legal. I used to do that before I got the AFMS for my KLN94 done. Just remember to use the real DME where required

Jesse wrote:

Robin / Apex / CEAPR never received FAA approval for other products then CAP 10 and R3000 as far as I am aware.

The 2160 has a FAA TCDS, too.

mh wrote:

The 2160 has a FAA TCDS, too.

Thanks, didn’t know that one.

Peter wrote:

Do they offer Robins with VFR avionics?

Yes they do.

Peter wrote:

I am puzzled as to where the original topic relates to a Robin.

I guess the topic starter had to questions.

NealCS wrote:

Can anyone please help me understand the options for specifying IFR capable avionics in a new aircraft (Looking at a Robin DR401CDI 2.0s – Assume the pilots are IR(R) qualified but will eventually get a full IR.)

NealCS wrote:

I’m close to deciding to buy a Robin DR401 UK based – (the 2.0s version is new so I can’t find any second hand examples) – it comes with standard VFR avionics for about €250k including VAT… Adding glass cockpit and IFR certified avionics with a top of the range autopilot bumps that up to €390k (inc VAT) – BIG DIFFERENCE!

If you want to install avionics, you need the certification for that equipment in that aircraft. There are several ways to get this approval under EASA:

• You can apply for a minor change approval. Everyone can apply for one, though most likely your avionics shop would do this for you. There is a fee for this, which depending on shop, would be the fee EASA charges + the fee that the shop charges for doing the application
• You can use an STC. There are STC for certain equipment / aircraft combination. Sometimes manufacturers such as Garmin and Aspen will allow you to use an AML STC. This is a very extensive STC for a lot of aircraft types. An STC is very expensive, typically starting at 10.000 Euro, so you would want to avoid this, as your paying massively for paperwork. Most Garmin and Aspen EASA AML STC are based on FAA approved AML STC’s. Because Robin DR-400 series where never certified under FAA, you won’t Robin DR-400 series on FAA AML STC’s. As they are not on the FAA AML STC they are not on the EASA AML STC either, which is a big disadvantage for Robin modifications, as this will require a different solution for these.
• You can install the equipment without additional approval if your aircraft is certified with this equipment. For example, if the Robin DR-401 part list contains for your serial a Garmin GTN-750, but not GTN-650, while yours is delivered with GNC-255A, you can install this GTN-750, but you could not install a GTN-650. So if the aircraft manufacturer has certified the aircraft with that kind of equipment you can use that as well.
• Aircraft manufacturers can also issue own approvals, which they often sell.
  - You can use CS-STAN, which is a new regulation which allows installation of upgrade of some avionics. It is a great help for VFR aircraft, or upgrading IFR aircraft. You can not use it for the modifications you describe.

NealCS wrote:

Not just the GPS, but also the installation in the given machine must be certified – so putting the wrong GPS in the wrong plane or in the wrong way could render it ‘uncertified’ and it is impractical/impossible to “get it certified” later.

Correct see above. It could be possible to redo the certification, it might require some more modifications, it also could be impossible. It will always be more expensive going this route then when you get the installation right the first time.

NealCS wrote:

1. If I install ‘non certified’ GPS I can covertly use it to make it easier to fly an NDB approach but I can’t fly an RNAV approach. From a regulatory perspective an uncertified GPS is the same as no GPS.

Correct. With the NDB approach you could either do the NDB approach on the ADF in VMC or IMC. Your ADF would be your means of navigation. You could check on the GPS under day VFR operation only. Do note this is from a regulations point of view.

What is the current equipment of the DR401 you are looking into? We might then give you the best possible situation for expanding the capabilities.

Jesse wrote:

Correct. With the NDB approach you could either do the NDB approach on the ADF in VMC or IMC. Your ADF would be your means of navigation. You could check on the GPS under day VFR operation only. Do note this is from a regulations point of view.

But nothing regulatory would prevent you from flying the NDB approach using an uncertified GPS for guidance as long as you have the ADF tuned, is constantly monitoring it and will take appropriate action if its indication gets out of tolerances for the approach.

Sure. It is just a bit strange that you can fly IMC with an unaccurate ADF, while you have an accurate GPS which is due to regulatory constrains is limited to VFR day. It just doesn’t make sense. This is where regulatory and practical use can make a large difference.

If one piece of avionics is sensitive for day / night then it would be ADF. With todays technology it would be better to have ADF as VFR day navigation method and use GPS as navigation in IMC.

I’m close to deciding to buy a Robin DR401 UK based – (the 2.0s version is new so I can’t find any second hand examples) – it comes with standard VFR avionics for about €250k including VAT… Adding glass cockpit and IFR certified avionics with a top of the range autopilot bumps that up to €390k (inc VAT) – BIG DIFFERENCE!

I am amazed there is a market in Europe (most of Robin’s sales are probably France) for a 250k plane which cannot be used for IFR. Is that because there really are enough people doing short runs (I do not believe there are anywhere near enough long distance VFR pilots to make a market for any plane), or is it because people fly “VFR” in IMC?

Correct. With the NDB approach you could either do the NDB approach on the ADF in VMC or IMC. Your ADF would be your means of navigation. You could check on the GPS under day VFR operation only. Do note this is from a regulations point of view.

I think there is considerable legal ambiguity around this.

Specifically I don’t think it is illegal to fly an NDB or VOR approach, using a VFR-only GPS (even some Ipad product) – provided you are carrying a working ADF/VOR or whatever gear. This is the ancient Usenet “tuna sandwich navigation” debate which goes back to the 1980s – basically as far as anybody could establish, for private flight, and provided you carried the equipment required for the airspace etc, you could actually navigate using a tuna sandwich. This is because all the US and European regs are framed in terms of equipment carried not equipment used. @Bookworm will remember that debate

Also it is legal to fly enroute IFR in UK Class G using an Ipad (etc) product – because IFR in UK Class G does not require BRNAV equipment (whose only means of compliance – for GA – is an IFR GPS). Or indeed with a tuna sandwich…

What you for sure cannot do with a VFR plane is fly IFR where BRNAV is required which is pretty well all Eurocontrol IFR. But again that’s because you need to carry an IFR GPS installation, with an AFMS approving the operation in question. If you achieve the required track by watching a rubber duck floating in a bucket of water, youa re 100% legal.

But nothing regulatory would prevent you from flying the NDB approach using an uncertified GPS for guidance as long as you have the ADF tuned, is constantly monitoring it and will take appropriate action if its indication gets out of tolerances for the approach.

Posts crossed

I am amazed there is a market in Europe (most of Robin’s sales are probably France) for a 250k plane which cannot be used for IFR. Is that because there really are enough people doing short runs (I do not believe there are anywhere near enough long distance VFR pilots to make a market for any plane), or is it because people fly “VFR” in IMC?

Sure there is a market. In Germany, many many flying clubs and flying schools have bought new C172s in the last 15 years. Price as above. And 80% of them are “VFR-only” (which can readily be recognized by the lack of DME; otherwise they are usually fully equipped with GPS and AP). Germany is full over VFR-only, leisure-time private pilots who simply enjoy flying “new stuff” for their Egelsbach to Koblenz (=Shoreham to Bembridge) burger runs. They just don’t want to fly in a 10.000-hour 1978 Piper Warrior with the old King stack.

Same for the Robin. A tiny minority of Robin aircraft are IFR approved, let alone flown IFR.

IFR flown Robins are very rare, and since less than ten percent of all Private Pilots in Europe (i think 5 percent in Germany) have an IFR rating, why would they buy IFR equipped planes?