Is this a crazy idea?

[okent]

I have a 2013 Flight Design CTLSi with Classic displays and Garmin 796 and a trutrak autopilot.  I want to obtain my IFR rating and am considering swapping out the 796 for a Garmin 175 or 355.  Also, considering changing to the HDX displays to add touch functionality along with changing to the Dynon autopilot to add a level button and autopilot control panel.

No plans to fly the plane in IFR conditions, just want to use it for training.

 

A couple of questions:

1. Is there a big difference between the Classic and HDX?

2.  Has anyone done this autopilot change?

3. Has anyone put an IFR navigator in their plane?

Thanks

[NC Bill]

I upgraded to 7" HDXs from SKYVIEWS shortly after they were released. The difference is mind blowing. Truly a state of the art LSA PFD. I sold the SKYVIEWS for half the cost of the HDXs. Try listing on other LSA and experimental sites besides Ctflier. That's were I sold mine one at a time.

As for autopilot I upgraded my TruTrak to their VISION with alt pre-select and a LEVEL button when that was introduced. Used it in HEADING mode on every takeoff at 300' AGL turning ON COURSE and climbing to altitude. Smooth transition. Never an issue. If you have a TruTrak DigiFlight II you might consider that option.

[Garrett Gee]

I did the autopilot change.  It was almost an exact fit for both the pitch and roll servos.  The Roll servo had to be moved back slightly, but the Tru Trak Bracket works with it.  Also had to fabricate a piece of .125 aluminum to connect the servo to the roll "control fork" (not sure if that's the right name).  It has been a night and day difference over the TruTrak in terms of function.  I also use my CTLS for IFR (experimental), and recently installed the Garmin GNX 375 to replace my Garmin 335 and 696.  It is a very capable IFR GPS/XPDR.  I considered the Vizion upgrade, but TruTrak was bought out right as I was starting, and Mid Continent was all but worthless at the time regarding the TruTrak.  Looking back, kind of glad they didn't help me, because I think the Dynon integrated Autopilot is a much better fit.

[okent]

Thanks for the info everyone.

 

Garrett, do you have D100/D120 or Skyviews?

[Garrett Gee]

I have the dual Skyview classic, so I can’t comment on the HDX. I am also wanting to get it, but can’t justify the cost right now.

Let me know if you have any questions.

[okent]

Thanks Garrett

[Jim Meade]

The picture of my IFR panel is on here somewhere.

[Anticept]

Keep in mind that doing instrument training in a CT is very difficult due to how squirrely they are.

I tried it. Got the experience and then switched to another aircraft to get the rating. Single pilot IFR is very difficult as it is, and due to the amount of precision required, you don't have time to fight the airplane, and the examiner WILL fail your autopilot for at minimum, an instrument approach.

Upside though: you can fly nice and slow. If you have to pull back the power and go 60 knots to give yourself time, do it! Nothing requires you to fly at full speed during the exam!

[FlyingMonkey]

11 hours ago, Anticept said:

Keep in mind that doing instrument training in a CT is very difficult due to how squirrely they are.

I prefer the term "sporty".  

[okent]

Thanks Corey.  It may not be worth upgrading the instrumentation then.  Don't want to make my training more difficult than it has to be but would like to fly what I've got.

Found your pic/post Jim.  That's exactly what I'm thinking of.

 

[Jim Ragain]

I upgraded the panel in my (experimental) 2011 CTLS. Garmin 650 with G5 backup, Dynon autopilot. I love the autopilot features. Plan to do my instrument training in it.  

[johnnyjr]

I'm in the process if swapping my Bendix KX125 Nav/COM to the Garmin 355 GPS/Com, retaining the 696 for back up map and data and installing the HS34 to use my CTSW as my IFR trainer.  I'm about 80% donw with wiring just need to get a couple days off work to head out to my A&P so we can install and wire it into the plane.  

I've done some instrument training already using the current Nav/Com.  Are they sporty, yes.  Can you get some very cost effective training in, absolutely!  I wouldn;t get scared away, the sportiness is not as bad as many would think, when your head down in on instruments you are able to maintain to PTS standards, especially when you do most if not all your training in your own bird. 

 

MY 2 cents, worth exactly what you paid for it!  Good luck!!

[okent]

Thanks for the replies!

I'm very comfortable in my CT and think the same reasons I've enjoyed getting my PPL training in the plane ("sporty handling") is a possible benefit for training for IFR. 

My justification for buying the plane was the convenience of scheduling flight training known maintenance history.  By dumb luck I broke even on cost with my first CT when I factored plane rental.  If I get a navigator and upgrade the autopilot I figure it would be a little more that renting an IFR bird and I'd have a well equipped plane in the end.

 

[NC Bill]

One last thought IMHO. If you are intent on flying IFR missions And not just punching your ticket then I suggest you consider training in the aircraft most similar to the one you intend t use. 

[okent]

I'd thought of that.  I'm almost finished building a Kitfox S7 which will be IFR equipped.  Waiting on an engine to show up from Edge Performance.  It "should" be finished up in a month or two at the most but nothing concrete.  May make more sense to just switch flying to the Kitfox.  But, the CT is a better traveling plane.  I'm planning on either an RV-10 or the new F4.  RV-10 will be ready in a year and a half, the F4 is a wildcard.

[Anticept]

On 6/25/2021 at 10:24 AM, okent said:

Thanks Corey.  It may not be worth upgrading the instrumentation then.  Don't want to make my training more difficult than it has to be but would like to fly what I've got.

Found your pic/post Jim.  That's exactly what I'm thinking of.

 

It wasn't exactly something I had chosen to do, opportunity just presented itself.

It's possible, just difficult. You didnt mention if you already have a nav radio. Single nav radio plus GPS isn't bad, since there is an allowance to substitute SOME fixes with GPS. If you don't have a nav radio, you are **not** going to be able to perform some of the training and testing requirements with either of those GPSs that you posted.

In the end, it was more practical for me to use what I already have for building that time and training, then switch to something else that could satisfy the ACS more easily. I only have a nav radio and no ADF/Marker beacon reciever, and that means I can only do approaches that have VOR radials for the fixes on the ACS, and single nav only approaches are VERY VERY difficult, and few and far between. If I had a TSO GPS too, that would open up a lot of things and I could have used my own airplane for it.