arj1 wrote:
Well, 1) is not anymore… You COULD fly with just one radio in the airways.
I could be wrong, again, but I believe this would depend on the Type Certificate (TC), and the associated Flight Manual (FM), of the aircraft. In my Rallye FM there is an IFR appendix in which the equipment required is outlined/defined, and one of those are a 2nd VHF radio.
I´m still not sure if one has to comply with the TC and/or FM of the aircraft or simply the EASA minimum equipment “required” for the type of operation (say IFR/VFR)?
gallois wrote:
In France a 2nd radio is also desirable as it is suggested that during cruise you monitor 121.5. But it is also helpful when you want to leave the frequency you are working to talk to one further down the line or listen to an ATIS without necessarily asking if you can leave the frequency.
Plenty of “modern” VHF radios have the monitor feature, where you have the primary (active) frequency tuned and then the pre-selected frequency can be “monitored” at the same time. Very useful for having 121.500 “monitored” or the eg. uncontrolled destination airfield.
I am not an instructor but AIUI the primary reason for training planes being mostly poorly equipped is because they get beaten to death, and in some cases nice kit (like Bose headsets) is simply smashed or stolen. Bose are easily broken, which is why training favours the cheapest D-C types. Especially in single door planes like the PA28 where everybody has to climb over everything and can easily step onto headsets or their cables. And passengers of renters (generally these are untraceable people) sometimes steal headsets… Ask any FI 
Re minimum equipment, any mandatory fit must be in Chapter 1 of the MM. Sometimes an STC is conditional on two radios – example.
Regarding that long list, of course a lot of it would be nice to have, but then you get into this territory which we all know doesn’t fly…
Please note that “airways” is a bad term (used in the UK to scare PPLs to death); the right way is what airspace class it is
Yeager wrote:
arj1 wrote: Well, 1) is not anymore… You COULD fly with just one radio in the airways.I could be wrong, again, but I believe this would depend on the Type Certificate (TC), and the associated Flight Manual (FM), of the aircraft. In my Rallye FM there is an IFR appendix in which the equipment required is outlined/defined, and one of those are a 2nd VHF radio.
I´m still not sure if one has to comply with the TC and/or FM of the aircraft or simply the EASA minimum equipment “required” for the type of operation (say IFR/VFR)?
As the OP has posted PA28 as a reference, I’ve posted the above, with COULD emphasized! :)
I’m surprised that an ANR headset is even on this list. This should really be standard today.
Other than that:
GPS navigator. Of course, we live in the 21st century
HSI
Dual radios
ADS-B can be portable, but ideally built in
Engine monitor: more for the school to catch impending issues, but also good for the student to learn proper leaning.
I don’t know the UK / EASA IR requirements so can’t comment on the ADF / DME situation.
Stuff like a G1000 may or may not be beneficial. For most people it seems to be easier to go from traditional six pack to glass than the other way round.
Yeager wrote:
I could be wrong, again, but I believe this would depend on the Type Certificate (TC), and the associated Flight Manual (FM), of the aircraft. In my Rallye FM there is an IFR appendix in which the equipment required is outlined/defined, and one of those are a 2nd VHF radio.I´m still not sure if one has to comply with the TC and/or FM of the aircraft or simply the EASA minimum equipment “required” for the type of operation (say IFR/VFR)?
If the TC says that you need two radios, then you do. But in principle, you could make a one radio STC…
I have a summary of the avionics requirements (with references) here.
Airborne_Again wrote:
If the TC says that you need two radios, then you do. But in principle, you could make a one radio STC…I have a summary of the avionics requirements (with references) here.
Excellent, I shall have a read on that. Tack.
24 & 25, ANR headsets, strike me as sinequanone for instructing
ANR headsets do make communication easier, and strike me as having a good enough benefit to hassle ratio to be universal for instruction. Either ANR or in-ear. Having both on hand I’ve lately found myself preferring the latter.
For VFR navigation something like SkyDemon running on a tablet is much better than a GTN650 or even a GTN750
That’s been my observation when watching others use those Garmin units. More hassle than they’re worth for my kind of flying and interests. Foreflight plus portable ADS-B IN is great for navigation and for the autonomous traffic awareness it provides as I fly from place to place in busy airspace. It’s also child’s play to use. Ergo, I think there’s no point in making navigation instruction complicated if the complication will add no value to the students subsequent operations.
Flight instruction is not just teaching at schools with students having exactly the same interests. Outside of that limited environment the equipment required for instruction depends entirely on what the student wants to learn, the kind of flying the student wants to do, and the kind of plane they eventually want to fly. Knob turning, button pushing and unnecessary talking to ATC is less interesting to me personally than flying itself. It was that way when I was a student and it’s never changed over the subsequent 20 years plus. Consequently, and also because I fly in a stable and pleasant climate I’ve never myself owned a plane with two comm radios nor felt the need to do so, never used an AI all that much except for instruction under the hood, I’ve never flown an ILS and have little interest in it, I’ve never used a DME, never used an ADF, only rarely use a VOR receiver or CDI, I’ve never used an autopilot, have never turned on pitot heat except to make sure it still works, don’t have much need for elaborate engine instrumentation to fly my O-320… although my fuel flow totalizer is helpful, but not mandatory. And so on. Only a cursory level of formal instruction in many of the ‘IT’ areas of flying was appropriate for my PPL needs and interests, and I would not have wanted to pay for anything else.
Inkognito wrote:
I feel ADSB in and out is a boon for really every plane, probably best used in conjunction with FLARM…
Absolutely agree with that!
Airborne_Again wrote:
For VFR navigation something like SkyDemon running on a tablet is much better than a GTN650 or even a GTN750.
Until it overheats, yeah sure.
Airborne_Again wrote:
Many (most) modern radios have a monitoring facility so that you can listen to the ATIS while still staying on the ATC frequency.
Yes, but that only works when there is no transmitting. Ever heard the Langen FIS freq on a sunny Sat?
Airborne_Again wrote:
For maximum endurance flights, yes. For the typical training or sightseeing sortie, you can do very well with making a sensible power setting and having good margins of fuel in the tanks.
Fuel flow is for lean of peak leaning to monitor power settings.
Just a couple of random points:
For VFR navigation something like SkyDemon running on a tablet is much better than a GTN650 or even a GTN750.
I once discussed this (GPS in PPL training) with the then head of UK CAA licensing. He said this is hard because there are multiple satnav vendors and the CAA cannot be seen to be favouring any one of them (I agree with this).
The point has also been made since that GPS can be used on the PPL, except in 1 or 2 specific exercises, but for some reason most schools refuse to take this on board.
Anyway, much previous debate on “GPS in the PPL”
Fuel flow is for lean of peak leaning to monitor power settings.
I don’t understand. FF can be used for multiple things.
I do think any “serious” plane should have a fuel totaliser, but that probably does not include those used for PPL training
