Presumably this avionics set up was original at point of manufacture? Piper would have sold the set up as IFR compliant?
Certainly, but if the plane was manufactured before the GPS age, you can get this problem.
Peter wrote:
Who is the £300 to
To the STC holder (Not me anymore!).
Peter wrote:
Isn’t there some old approval for a GNS430?
There is an old German LBA approval which granted a blanket Part 23 AML approval on the back of the Garmin’s original FAA STC on a PA32. It’s for the non-W GNS. There are also many other Minor changes (CAA etc) for BRNav and LNav approach. PRNav and LPV always required STC approval in Europe. Here’s the 530 version:
530_STC_RC_SA_1124_282_29_pdf
Presumably this avionics set up was original at point of manufacture? Piper would have sold the set up as IFR compliant? What has happened in the interim? Database or software not kept updated? IFR pitot static checks out of date, but some of this is VFR relevant in any event.
It would have had the relevant STC in the POH as new.
Who is the £300 to?
Isn’t there some old approval for a GNS430? Also (other threads I am sure) it was LPV which needed an STC (to get the AFMS) and non-LPV installs didn’t need it. It’s all here somewhere 
Peter wrote:
The 430 is so old, and pre-dates the 2003 “EASA takeover of certification”, that there must be various national approvals. Like the blanket UK CAA approval of the EDM700 (on the UK AAN database) which then got grandfathered into EASA. @wigglyamp is sure to know.
Indeed there is an EASA AML STC for the GNS range (GNS-W and also upgrading from a non-W GNS) which provides full IFR capability.
10037701_CERT_REV_3_20170307_pdf
The STC certificate on its own is not sufficient – you need the full data pack issued to the specific aircraft along with the AFMS, It’s just Euro 300.
boscomantico wrote:
Sure, but the cost for the STC for a GNS430/W is small, and you get a lot more capability, particularly if it’s a flight school plane based at an IFR airport.
I know, but some just could not be bothered.
Peter wrote:
As regards “VFR” placards, that may not mean anything because most people don’t understand how this stuff works
Oh, yeah! In some cases I’ve seen, there is a label on a panel, but no such limit in AFM.
Or the label says “aircraft is VFR only” and AFM says “GPS in 430 could be used for VFR only” and so on.
The 430 is so old, and pre-dates the 2003 “EASA takeover of certification”, that there must be various national approvals. Like the blanket UK CAA approval of the EDM700 (on the UK AAN database) which then got grandfathered into EASA. @wigglyamp is sure to know.
As regards “VFR” placards, that may not mean anything because most people don’t understand how this stuff works
Sure, but the cost for the STC for a GNS430/W is small, and you get a lot more capability, particularly if it’s a flight school plane based at an IFR airport.
boscomantico wrote:
understand that there is a little paperwork involved with getting a GPS installation IFR approved. But why would a flight school, which advertises it as VFR/IFR, not do this, on an aircraft equipped like that?How do you legally fly IFR in NL without an approved GPS?
They might be using it for flights under VFR/VMC, simulated IMC, I know some schools in the UK precisely that.
Example: https://www.planecheck.com?ent=da&id=57650
I understand that there is a little paperwork involved with getting a GPS installation IFR approved. But why would a flight school, which advertises it as VFR/IFR, not do this, on an aircraft equipped like that?
How do you legally fly IFR in NL without an approved GPS?
Local copy PDF
added, using this.
