SP-400 handheld can display an ILS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SP-400 handheld can display an ILS
Just seen this in U.S. Flying. $400.
This would make a great emergency backup.
Does anybody know whether it has an Icom-compatible headset connection? I have a Bose headset adapter for my Icom A22.
Has anybody had issues importing these "non CAA approved" radios from the USA? I have never heard of any problems.
This would make a great emergency backup.
Does anybody know whether it has an Icom-compatible headset connection? I have a Bose headset adapter for my Icom A22.
Has anybody had issues importing these "non CAA approved" radios from the USA? I have never heard of any problems.
540,
I believe you've been around the ga block a bit. Would you really trust a handheld glideslope indication? I think I would rather put my faith in a headset adapter (as you say) and accept a par or sra!
I believe you've been around the ga block a bit. Would you really trust a handheld glideslope indication? I think I would rather put my faith in a headset adapter (as you say) and accept a par or sra!
Would you really trust a handheld glideslope indication?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Donkey's years ago I used to use an ICOM with VOR for post PPL radio nav in basic rental aircraft. I found it unbelievably unreliable, completely dependent on an ability to receive a decent signal, and the display virtually unreadable to my then relatively youthful eyes.
Hello Jan
The handheld ILS receiver has not been certified for primary use as such whereas the panel mounted version has. The handheld version has not been tested by the authorities from immunity against interference. Just try it near the compass on your Rans for example and see what it does ( if anything-my point exactly-not tested...)
Handheld are great for a backup in an emergency, indeed about 15 years ago iused a handheld Icom with an external aerial in a Luscombe I flew as a primary com, although there was no requirement to carry a com it does increase situational awareness. Anything that improves safety is good. My concern with the 'handheld ILS' is that pilots will use it as such...
On saying that, allow me to reitterate that there is always the PAR and the SRA. Much safer than eyeballing your way down the 'slope with a handheld radio's screen, possibly held by one hand.
I do however always carry a handheld comm in my flightbag for work (jets) just incase!
The handheld ILS receiver has not been certified for primary use as such whereas the panel mounted version has. The handheld version has not been tested by the authorities from immunity against interference. Just try it near the compass on your Rans for example and see what it does ( if anything-my point exactly-not tested...)
Handheld are great for a backup in an emergency, indeed about 15 years ago iused a handheld Icom with an external aerial in a Luscombe I flew as a primary com, although there was no requirement to carry a com it does increase situational awareness. Anything that improves safety is good. My concern with the 'handheld ILS' is that pilots will use it as such...
On saying that, allow me to reitterate that there is always the PAR and the SRA. Much safer than eyeballing your way down the 'slope with a handheld radio's screen, possibly held by one hand.
I do however always carry a handheld comm in my flightbag for work (jets) just incase!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would you really trust a handheld glideslope indication?
Donkey's years ago I used to use an ICOM with VOR for post PPL radio nav in basic rental aircraft. I found it unbelievably unreliable, completely dependent on an ability to receive a decent signal, and the display virtually unreadable to my then relatively youthful eyes.
When I used to self fly hire, the planes were really crap and half the stuff didn't work. I was constantly flying with the Icom on a bracket, and every comms frequency would be backed-up in that too, in case the radio packed up. I found it reliable for VORs too (actually it was handy because it would directly read out the numeric radial FROM the VOR, which the old panel radios could not do) but only if one had a line of sight between its aerial, and the VOR.
there is always the PAR and the SRA
MI6's best moles in the USSR told them that the commies will never invade on a weekend because they are too drunk, so the RAF doesn't work at weekends, so no PAR there either. Nobody on the frequency, even.
SAR approaches have lousy minima. I could fly one with a handheld GPS, to a lower level.
But I have just realised there is a better way... My Garmin 496 can be programmed to generate a synthetic ILS which takes you down to 500ft AGL - to any airfield in the database.
540
You could indeed fly a gps approach with your handheld, totally illegal and uanpproved, but I do assume you mean in a (declared) emergency here? At least the SAR is legal and has published minima. The handheld you fly with, can it do a raim prediction and would you have time in an emergency to plug in waypoints off a plate for a pseudo approach at an unfamiliar airport? Give me the talkdown any day!
As far as teaching ILS before solo, to impart knowledge of the basics (ie handling and airmanship) let alone how to set up and fly an ILS takes enough of the average pre solo students skill set. Remember how long it took you as a beginner to set an approach up? It's best at that level to keep them out of the clouds, and to assess the met every flight. (Good exercise to show is also how quickly a student or average ppl can loose it in cloud)
I hope a reliable light aircraft portable GPWS (not TAWS) comes out soon... Good luck with the Garmin, watch those hills mate!
You could indeed fly a gps approach with your handheld, totally illegal and uanpproved, but I do assume you mean in a (declared) emergency here? At least the SAR is legal and has published minima. The handheld you fly with, can it do a raim prediction and would you have time in an emergency to plug in waypoints off a plate for a pseudo approach at an unfamiliar airport? Give me the talkdown any day!
As far as teaching ILS before solo, to impart knowledge of the basics (ie handling and airmanship) let alone how to set up and fly an ILS takes enough of the average pre solo students skill set. Remember how long it took you as a beginner to set an approach up? It's best at that level to keep them out of the clouds, and to assess the met every flight. (Good exercise to show is also how quickly a student or average ppl can loose it in cloud)
I hope a reliable light aircraft portable GPWS (not TAWS) comes out soon... Good luck with the Garmin, watch those hills mate!
Last edited by 500 above; 9th Sep 2010 at 14:17.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you mean in a (declared) emergency here?
As far as teaching ILS before solo, to impart knowledge of the basics (ie handling and airmanship) let alone how to set up and fly an ILS takes enough of the average pre solo students skill set.
My son could fly an ILS at 12 and did so pretty well perfectly at every aviation exhibition he went to, on the Frasca stand. As an emergency procedure, it isn't hard.
The handheld you fly with, can it do a raim prediction and would you have time in an emergency to plug in waypoints off a plate for a pseudo approach at an unfamiliar airport?
Whatever the 496 may be, you as an 'experienced' ga pilot should not be advocating it's use for instrument approaches on these forums.There are some types out there who may just use it as such full time, you know this full well. We've all met the resident scud runners and the chap with the hp twin who sets up his or her own 'approach' to an otherwise VFR field and has got away with it so far.
What happens when the GPS signal is lost? It does happen.
Maybe you should petition the CAA or EASA ( you do fly on a European licence, I assume?) to increase the minimum ppl hours to include more than the present 45 also. When I was the CFI of a school in a past life, neither my instructors or I guaranteed a pass to anyone within the minimum time for the simple reason that every student is different. Many, I have to say did it in the minimums. Those were the students who put effort in. It sounds like your son could be one of them. Having a father with a licence certainly helps. Good luck to him and his 'flying exhibitions'. On the other hand, many students with prior flight time with family and the like had learned bad habits and poor airmanship was installed in them, monkey see monkey do.
What happens when the GPS signal is lost? It does happen.
Maybe you should petition the CAA or EASA ( you do fly on a European licence, I assume?) to increase the minimum ppl hours to include more than the present 45 also. When I was the CFI of a school in a past life, neither my instructors or I guaranteed a pass to anyone within the minimum time for the simple reason that every student is different. Many, I have to say did it in the minimums. Those were the students who put effort in. It sounds like your son could be one of them. Having a father with a licence certainly helps. Good luck to him and his 'flying exhibitions'. On the other hand, many students with prior flight time with family and the like had learned bad habits and poor airmanship was installed in them, monkey see monkey do.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I said, I was talking about emergency use.
The official "PPL way" of getting back down is to call up 121.50 and they will supposedly help, but if the bad wx extends beyond your fuel...? Also, their official coverage is poor/nonexistent at low level. That option is really for pilots with no instrument skills.
In an emergency, legal considerations are immaterial. You do what presents the lowest risk. This does not always (or even often!) align with actual (or perceived) legalities
But here we go...
That is correct, for a G-reg.
For an N-reg they appear to be illegal (ref FAR 91.175).
That is also correct as stated but the situation is less clear cut. For private ops (non-AOC), the equipment carriage regs state what equipment should be carried. They do not state what equipment should be used. This means e.g. you can fly an NDB or VOR approach using any other means (like a GPS, which is what nearly everybody does anyway, including airlines which fly them on the FMS.
More or less everywhere, if an airfield wants commercial flights, they have to stick an NDB in, and possibly a DME. Nobody will use the NDB for real but it has to be there to publish "IFR capability" and it is a lot cheaper than a VOR or an ILS.
One commuter airline ATP explained this to me last week. They don't have INS (twin turboprop) and they fly NP approaches using (in effect) GPS. All that is required is that the ground equipment is not notamed INOP. (JAR-OPS but not in the UK).
For OCAS certainly, nobody has found a reg yet which says e.g. an NDB IAP must be flown exclusively using the ADF. Any means of flying the published track is OK.
The official "PPL way" of getting back down is to call up 121.50 and they will supposedly help, but if the bad wx extends beyond your fuel...? Also, their official coverage is poor/nonexistent at low level. That option is really for pilots with no instrument skills.
In an emergency, legal considerations are immaterial. You do what presents the lowest risk. This does not always (or even often!) align with actual (or perceived) legalities
But here we go...
Nothing illegal about home made GPS approaches for private operations as far as I am aware.
For an N-reg they appear to be illegal (ref FAR 91.175).
No handheld gps as far as I'm aware has approach approval.
More or less everywhere, if an airfield wants commercial flights, they have to stick an NDB in, and possibly a DME. Nobody will use the NDB for real but it has to be there to publish "IFR capability" and it is a lot cheaper than a VOR or an ILS.
One commuter airline ATP explained this to me last week. They don't have INS (twin turboprop) and they fly NP approaches using (in effect) GPS. All that is required is that the ground equipment is not notamed INOP. (JAR-OPS but not in the UK).
For OCAS certainly, nobody has found a reg yet which says e.g. an NDB IAP must be flown exclusively using the ADF. Any means of flying the published track is OK.
If you guys have the time you should search pprune for DIY instrument approaches. 540, I too fly approaches (in a multi crew jet with Efis/twin fms etc) such as ndb or VOR/DME 'out of the box' or straight from the fms. This is legal. However, I monitor the raw data 'classic' navaids also during this time. Vnav gives me a kind of glideslope, as you talk about. However, this is not using a handheld gps!
Rnav approaches are becoming quite common nowadays. Good if you have the kit.
Rnav approaches are becoming quite common nowadays. Good if you have the kit.
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm interested in this SP-400 as well. Aviation Consumer in the US gave it quite a good review, describing it as 'better than some panel-mounted gear' although some of the customer comments on the Sporty's website expressed concern about the apparently rather weak plastic used in its outer casing with one or two commenting that range with the standard aerial might be an issue. Overall most customer comments were very positive though.
Looks like a pretty decent piece of kit.
Looks like a pretty decent piece of kit.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No idea personally about the 296, but I have read on a US forum that the 296 does this too.
The 496 "ILS" setup procedure (in part) is:
You have to go to the Setup page and set the VNAV waypont parameters to 0.0nm and 0 feet AGL and then program a descent rate appropriate for your airplane -- add a bit for a margin of error since the pseudo-glideslope is based on groundspeed.
I haven't tried it yet. I believe it works only with real airports. Certainly the VNAV feature seems to work that way; the other day I could not get it to compute the -VS when the DCT waypoint was a VOR.
The 496 "ILS" setup procedure (in part) is:
You have to go to the Setup page and set the VNAV waypont parameters to 0.0nm and 0 feet AGL and then program a descent rate appropriate for your airplane -- add a bit for a margin of error since the pseudo-glideslope is based on groundspeed.
I haven't tried it yet. I believe it works only with real airports. Certainly the VNAV feature seems to work that way; the other day I could not get it to compute the -VS when the DCT waypoint was a VOR.
Last edited by IO540; 11th Sep 2010 at 10:51.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Denmark
Age: 62
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First ILS flown with the SP-400
I did it yesterday. The SP-400 ILS works as advertised - readable, steady, precise and easy to follow. Most IFR planes I fly only have one battery and one generator, so the SP-400 is a cheap backup. I have had 4 generator failures in 2000 hrs (3 of them in 3 different PA-32s that I have flown a total of less than 150 hrs - watch out for PA-32s!) - 2 generator failures occured in IFR, one during night IMC, which was scary because the aircraft battery was not fully charged at the time of the failure, so I did not know how much time I had before things would go dark. When I first heard of the SP-400 I thought of that incidence immediately. Of course I use a handheld GPS also; a trusty old GPSmap196 or a Garmin 96C; nothing fancy.
An SP-400 shortcoming, perhaps: my (very) old KX-99 will accept an OBS selection without actually recieving a VOR; the SP-400 will not. It is not really an issue for emergency use. Tuning a VOR, the SP-400 centers the needle automatically. When the reception/needle is steady, it locks the OBS setting. The big display shows OBS, bearing/radial and of course a big CDI. I guess this it how it should work for emergency use.
Another problem that I need to investigate: using a headset adapter and an old David Clark 13.4 headset I was able to transmit, the station 30 NM away reading me 5, but I could not hear the answer, only a weak noise. Using the SP-400 without headset, holding the speaker close to my ear, worked better. But using the headset should of course be preferred, so I need to find out what is wrong.
The SP-400 COM reciever is significantly better (more sensitive) than my old handheld, the KX-99. I can tell by dialing distant ATIS'es on the two of them.
An SP-400 shortcoming, perhaps: my (very) old KX-99 will accept an OBS selection without actually recieving a VOR; the SP-400 will not. It is not really an issue for emergency use. Tuning a VOR, the SP-400 centers the needle automatically. When the reception/needle is steady, it locks the OBS setting. The big display shows OBS, bearing/radial and of course a big CDI. I guess this it how it should work for emergency use.
Another problem that I need to investigate: using a headset adapter and an old David Clark 13.4 headset I was able to transmit, the station 30 NM away reading me 5, but I could not hear the answer, only a weak noise. Using the SP-400 without headset, holding the speaker close to my ear, worked better. But using the headset should of course be preferred, so I need to find out what is wrong.
The SP-400 COM reciever is significantly better (more sensitive) than my old handheld, the KX-99. I can tell by dialing distant ATIS'es on the two of them.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Chilterns/Blighty
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I stuck my SP-400 on the side of the coaming on two approaches in VMC and it matched the ship's ILS accurately.
I'll try it on a light single soon and report back.
I'll try it on a light single soon and report back.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But is there any reason a handheld glideslope receiver should be less reliable than its panel-mounted counterpart?
for a panel mounted ILS the localizer dots are 0.5 deg deviation each and the glideslope dots are 0.14 deg deviation each.
According to sportys manual the SP400 localizer deviation is 1 degree deviation per dot, i.e half the accuracy of a panel mounted localizer. The glideslope accuracy is not mentioned, but if each dot is something far away from 0.14 degrees deviation I would be very cautious to be below the glidepath.
I wouldn't be suprised if the manual is wrong though, but it should be confirmed before you use the ILS functionality.
Whats the best way to buy the SP400 In the UK? Do you order it directly form Sportys?