When I used to mess around with classic cars, there was an adage that it was always cheaper to buy someone else’s labour of love than to restore something yourself.
I suspect the same applies to decades-old aeroplanes and their avionics.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
a 2nd Nav/Com with 8.33 (as you can’t legally use the other one in case the GTN packs up)
Really? Is this a national rule that the FOCA somehow can get away with because Switzerland is not an EU member?
By EASA rules there is no prohibition whatsoever on carrying or using 25 kHz radio equipment. Of course you can’t (legally) use 8.33 kHz channels, but if the GTN COM stops working, you can dial in 121.5 on the other radio. No one can fault you for this as you are not required to have a second COM in the first place!
Airborne_Again wrote:
No one can fault you for this as you are not required to have a second COM in the first place!
Plus, 121.5 will remain a 25kHz frequency anyway :-)
mh wrote:
Plus, 121.5 will remain a 25kHz frequency anyway :-)
Actually, I think it is a 50 kHz-frequency. Or possibly even 100 kHz.
The OP’s candidate aircraft seems a reasonable proposition if you recognise the mission of a robust, simple SEP. It will carry a good load for four hours at 120KTAS. If it is coming with an updated 8.33 NAV/COM even better. DME would be useful and a Kn64 is easy to find, but technically in a radar environment you can request the glide slope check point from radar. The IFR GPS will provide correct distance if the ILS procedure is loaded.
Airline cadet schools limit their IFR SEP, which are very well equipped, to ceilings of 1,000 AGL on departure and arrival. Basically allowing enough ceiling for a forced landing. They have a duty of care and corporate manslaughter liability to manage, so a reasonable standard.
No need for an HSI although a G5 is now good value.
Adding avionics in an SEP beyond planned light IFR use, seems to me a possible risk shift where the operator then believes the mission capability has been enhanced.
Do you need an LPV (or any RNAV1/PRNAV) capable plane to do the CB IR? I would be really surprised.
For sure a general purpose IFR plane needs
For an IR test you may need an ADF and a means of tracking a VOR. The ADF bit is variable according to who you ask, and can depend on whether you can organise the test to use airports which have no NDBs.
Obviously there will be disagreements on the details. Some people never fly an ILS and some never need a DME. Countless SR22s were imported without a DME; presumably they use GPS and hope they got the right waypoint 
or they avoid flying IAPs which involve a DME. Some people find LPV very useful, in which case you are looking at a more modern aircraft.
@Neal
With all respect but for me it does not make sense to establish a “Mallorca shuttle“ with a slow SEP.
For this Airlines do a much better job.
I prefer to go to places which are not easily accessible and where my slow plane gives me a real advantage. Islands certainely do fall into this category but may be not in the case of Mallorca.
Airborne_Again wrote:
Really? Is this a national rule that the FOCA somehow can get away with because Switzerland is not an EU member?
It’s a question or practicability. If the single GNS stops working, in this day and age with the prices of 8.33 radios quite down, I don’t see a reason to become an emergency or a NORDO. In practice, you can then continue with your 2nd hand gps and have your position and do normal radio. It’s an advantage if the 2nd navcom does have a 2nd ILS too. In the case of the OP’s plane, in theory he could leave the old KX175B and use it as a 2nd nav receiver and 121.5 radio, but getting a used non-waas 430 as a 2ndary radio is not really the big budget breaker or at least get a Trigg or something to have a 2nd radio. Or, make an antenna port and get a Yaesu handheld with 8.33. I got one whch even has a full ILS and emergency GPS.
RobertL18C wrote:
No need for an HSI although a G5 is now good value.
Yes the G5 is good value for relatively small money, also the Aspen E5 can do the job and it’s upgradable. Also having 2 horizons is a good idea in any IFR plane. I have the Aspen 1000 and would get it again in any airplane, by far the most versatile instrument I’ve ever had. Also the fact that GPSS computers are not needed with legacy AP’s like in the OP’s piper AP is quite interesting.
RobertL18C wrote:
Adding avionics in an SEP beyond planned light IFR use, seems to me a possible risk shift where the operator then believes the mission capability has been enhanced.
Well, it is enhanced but of course it needs to be used with care. LPV for instance is becoming a bigger and bigger issue. Given the base of the OP, there are even now several airports around who have only GPS approaches with LPV (Donaueschingen for instance) as well as the way France is going, it will be exactly the GA fields which need this feature. I’d go as far and say GA IFR will profit more from LPV capability than airliners do, as the places they go to will have ILS’s for many years.
To be able to fly IFR at all in our area means to fly in winter or not quite often. My plane has been flown through low stratus many times since it has become capable, even on missions which were to simply move the plane out of ZRH to a training area for conversion training or other stuff. It also has seen some IFR checkflights performed on it. That does indeed increase the operating capability quite a bit. Primarily it allows flight in IMC conditions, which in ZRH is any time the vis is below 5km and or ceiling is belov 1500 ft. Even departing IFR into a 4500 m vis to cancel the moment you are on top (seen that done) and continue to your training field is make or break for the day. With an IFR capable pilot flying the IFR leg, that is quite easy, if it’s an IRI even the student can get som IR experience.
Peter wrote:
Do you need an LPV (or any RNAV1/PRNAV) capable plane to do the CB IR? I would be really surprised.
You don’t need it but you will then have to take the additional training when you actually want to use it. In the training environment here however, see above, some of the nicer training airports already are LPV and have no other approaches. I do expect that sooner or later LPV will become a integral part of the IR, as it makes sense. Peter wrote:
For sure a general purpose IFR plane needs IFR GPS (a KLN94 would do; it is all I have) autopilot with altitude hold ILS and DME two radios, at least one of which needs to be 8.33
True. Looking at what the OP’s plane has now, he has a transponder S and one NAV/COM with 25 hz. He sais it also has the AP, but I don’t see it. There also is an ADF gauge but I can’t see the radio in the panel. The stormscope may well become handy in IFR if it works, I doubt it’s repairable.
To install a KLN94 or similar in todays day and age is simply a waste of money. If you must, install a GNS430 which at least solves 3 problems at once. 8.33, GPS and GS.
I agree with altitude hold, what the OP’s plane has now is a simple AP with HDG hold. So he needs a S-Tec Sys 30 Alt or PSS 60. The PSS 60 will offer VS and GS hold which I see quite a lot in combination with those Piper AP’s. Actually, looking at the pics I don’t see that AP, nor do I see the radio coupler, but they might be below the 1st pic he posted. Finding a KR87 box however if the installation is there is easy, but you don’t really need it. I don’t think anyone here would demand an NDB approach flown. That appears to be a UK thing.
Peter wrote:
Countless SR22s were imported without a DME; presumably they use GPS and hope they got the right waypoint or they avoid flying IAPs which involve a DME.
In many cases LPV will do away with the need for DME because instead of the ILS procedure you can fly the GPS procedure, eg in Zurich. But it is still good to have. But I agree, to install it is a bit like the KLN94… it will do the job if it’s there but to install it depends on the use.
Peter wrote:
ome people find LPV very useful, in which case you are looking at a more modern aircraft.
To get LPV approval is not a big deal. All you need is a WAAS GPS really. LPV is a big deal only in G1000 airplanes and the likes as they have you over a barrel with the upgrade. For those planes which have normal radios, adding LPV is comparatively inexpensive. Any up to date GNS/GTN/IFD can do that.
Thanks to everyone who contributed. I am going to see the plane tomorrow and will keep you updated. But as I understand upgrading it to IFR probably makes no sense so rather use it and gain VFR experience and exchange it for a more capable plane later.
Antonio wrote:
the Switzerland-Mallorca direct mission does not work due to customs/immigration unavailable at LESB: you are going to have to do an intermediate stop anyway.
I probably need that stop to refuel as well and using the toilet ;-)
@ Neal do let me know when you are around in Mallorca
WILCO 
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Do I understand you correctly, you are getting this plane with a new com and audiopanel installed for 24k Eurosˋ?
Yes that is true. TT 5800 h on the airframe, prop 1525 h and O-360 1525 h
Peter wrote:
the choice of planes is a DA42
That would be my dream but out of budget for now.cessnatraveller wrote:
cessna traveller wrote:
With all respect but for me it does not make sense to establish a “Mallorca shuttle“ with a slow SEP.
No it doesn’t but it’s also about flying myself and weather also has to be taken into account as with such a plane only light IFR is possible and no way to deal with ice.
I do expect that sooner or later LPV will become a integral part of the IR
That would really surprise me, since countries without LPV approaches would strongly object in committee, and the UK is not the only one with few (or none).
To install a KLN94 or similar in todays day and age is simply a waste of money. If you must, install a GNS430 which at least solves 3 problems at once. 8.33, GPS and GS.
I agree about not installing one, but if you find a nice well looked after plane with a KLN94, that is ok to run with.
A GNS430 / GNS430W / GTN650 is quite poor by itself due to the very tiny map. Sure you can fly with it, and many do, but much of the Eurocontrol IFR game is tactically pressing for shortcuts, and one really benefits from another box with a large screen.
And a plane with a 430+530, 650+750, etc, is going to cost quite a bit more.
In many cases LPV will do away with the need for DME because instead of the ILS procedure
Sure you don’t need a DME where the procedure does not use a DME, but it will be many years, possibly never in some cases, before LPV is universal.
To get LPV approval is not a big deal
It is a very big deal for the airport, however.
One needs to look at the various airports of relevance. That is why I have not gone for LPV yet – can’t justify the ~30k outlay. Majorca’s two airports have ILS and LPV in one case and nothing in the other case.
