Until 8.33 kHz became mandatory, our RV-7 had a Garmin SL-30 radio which would have fulfilled the requirements of NCO.IDE.A.195(a) when operating out of sight of surface; Currently, an Icom IC-210E is installed instead, and thus no further radio navigation equipment is present.
I was pondering the idea to redo the radio stack on our present panel (see above) and add a new Garmin GMA-245 audio panel and the SL-30 from the cupboard back into the stack, but as it seems that VORs are being phased out, it is questionable if that would be of practical use. Another alternative would be to ditch the IC-210E and buy a Garmin GNC-255 (or the vapourware Trig Nav/Com if it ever comes to the market), but as with the SL-30, the actual usefulness is doubtful and for that money, a Garmin GPS 175 could be bought.
In your view, should we simply accept that a GPS navigator is the only practical solution to fulfill the legal requirements and bite into that sour apple? Or keep the old SL-30 as legal backup since the actual navigation is done via Skydemon on redundant devices anyway? Even the old GNS-430(W) is still quite pricey and nearing the end of its supported life (but would nicely fulfill all our needs).
Sebastian_H wrote:
Even the old GNS-430(W) is still quite pricey and nearing the end of its supported life (but would nicely fulfill all our needs).
I believe GN430 & GNC255 would cost about the same.
I would keep a VOR. That said, the GNc255 is a he only new VOR receiver that I know of, and it is a significant cost compared to a simple Com unit.
If you have a SL30 somewhere, put it. It gives you VOR and a COM 2. Even if 25k, it can be useful.
Jujupilote wrote:
If you have a SL30 somewhere, put it. It gives you VOR and a COM 2. Even if 25k, it can be useful.
That was my first thought as well. One drawback I can think of is that the single COM antenna currently installed is a bent whip on the belly, and there’s hardly any room to mount a second one on the underside; I assume that running the SL-30 only connected to the NAV antenna is probably not recommended.
arj1 wrote:
I believe GN430 & GNC255 would cost about the same.
The GNC255, GPS175, and GNS430 seem to be around the same amount, and I assume that the Trig NAV/COM – if it ever sees the light of day – would be in the same ballpark. One advantage of the GNS430 would be that it has COM, NAV, and GPS in one nice package. I had an initial look at the Avidyne IFD440, but at around 10k, it makes no sense for a VFR-day experimental.
Why one can’t use a paper map for primary VFR above the clouds? Of course SkyDemon or ForeFlight for enhanced situational awareness 
I would go with Garmin Area 660 !
Ibra wrote:
Why one can’t use a paper map for primary VFR above the clouds?
One could – at least in Airspaces in which ATC doesn’t give you a track to a fix (i.e. Golf and Echo). However, the art of navigating with ASI, Compass and Chronometer alone has become somewhat rusty over the last decades …
In airspaces where you need a flight plan that describe a flightpath (fix to fix) or where ATC can give you a track to a fix, Part NCO requires that the airplane is “equipped” with suitable navigators if you can’t navigate with visual reference to terrain. Therefore a tablet solution would not qualify as only nav aid.
I have a few hours now of VFR XC with a GPS175. It is nice, but 0% needed for VFR. Or maybe 1% when you phone/tablet looses GPS. The Garmin reception is rock solid. When on top, having a VOR or aviation GPS is a plus.
I would say some sort of ipad mount on the panel is even more required.
If you can get a 430 for the price of a new 255, I would go for the 430. That’s 3 capabilities for the price of 2. And its 8.33.
“In airspaces where you need a flight plan that describe a flightpath”
So I need a GPS or DME+VOR to fly a Cub VFR over open water or deserted land in Class D under Part NCO?
