Peter wrote:
I am damn sure the KLN94 has been IFR approved in EASA-land
Yes, I took my IR proficiency test on a KLN94-equipped C172, but I suspect it was a factory configuration.
@Ultranomad I am sure there are EASA approved KLN94, in the G reg sub set apparently no one ever approved it for approaches but yes en route BRNAV. I expect the approval for LNAV approaches requires hooking up an altitude input (the approach integrity check requires updating baro), linking it to a CDI/HSI, and having a message panel in the main scan area.
I had no idea that specific avionics installations in a specific aircraft had to be approved for approaches or en-route navigation.
Perhaps rather innocently, I’d assumed that if you purchased certified kit and had it installed in your certified aircraft then you could use that kit to the fullest of its abilities.
How do I know that our new GTN650Xi & G5 installation is ‘approved for approaches’, or indeed en-route nav, in our TB10?
There should be an AFMS detailing this – a section in the POH.
If it is missing, the installer didn’t do his job.
Yes; very few people know this.
@Graham I understand the CAA would carry out a similar process to the FAA. There will be an STC for the installation and airframe/type, and there will be an AFMS. Hopefully someone conversant in CAA speak will advise what forms need to be supplied with the installation, but you should have received a fair amount of documentation. The old saw applies: when the paperwork exceeds the weight of the aircraft we can fly :)
Ah so it’s just another way of saying there needs to be an STC covering it. I get it now.
Yes that is my understanding, you need TC+AFM or STC+AFMS, I flew few Robins with 2*G5+GTN installs that are not approved for LNAV or LPV as nothing in the POH about it…
No need for an STC to obtain the AFMS. If you have time, read this for a non-STC example.
In Europe, EASA-reg, due to the difficulty, low industry competence, money extraction practices, cost and general hassle of getting EASA Major mods approved, an AML STC has become the way to do it, however, which is why Garmin own the European avionics market now, and is why non-AML-STC avionics work has basically died (in piston GA).
Before AML STCs became the normal way for avionics, huge numbers of GNS boxes went into EASA-reg planes without any AFMS being generated. I know one installer who himself did ~100 GNS430s, with barely a line in the airframe logbook. He never heard of “AFMS” and neither did 99% of the aircraft owners. In theory all of these cannot fly a GPS approach 
AFMS = approved flight manual supplement.
A requirement for IFR approval for a GPS system.
All done in my DR400 years back for a KLN98b.
