Great points Aft,So last night I dug through the manual for the Dynon and sure enough, I could dispense with the EFIS entirely if I wanted to. I can go 100% moving map, 100% EIS, split screen 50/50, etc. What I realized is that display manufacturers make ad copy with a lot of features turned on to impress consumers with the capability and that is what makes it look so cluttered. I can even see my way to installing two tubes on my side by side panel and swapping displays so flying from either seat is a no brainer. For IFR, split EFIS and EIS on one tube and moving map on the other.
And finally, I'm surprised that Rick didn't make a bigger point of this (one of my former students did): Software and database updates are free with Dynon and not so much with brand G. In fact a few years of not paying for IFR database updates will pay for my second display. Add to that brand G's history of abandoning hardware it is making this choice very easy.
Here is a hint...Could be to save money and time during the type certification process. That was the rationale provided for the Cirrus being placarded against spins, for example. I heard they saved several years of flight testing and review by specifying the only approved spin recovery method is "pull red handle".
I don't know much about the TC process, but I assume that to certify a new aircraft design for IFR operation, the manufacturer would have to equip a test aircraft, test it thoroughly in IMC operations, and get FAA approval of the results. In the early 70s the market was flooded with IFR capable 4 place aircraft from Cessna, Piper, and others. Maybe Bellanca concluded there just wasn't a business case for the added time and expense.
In that case the easiest work around is to simply write into the manual that you can't use this AC for IFR. Maybe Champion did not have to do that because most of their planes were type certified before IFR existed.
It could be there is some inherent design limitation or performance parameter that poses an obstacle to IFR certification. However, I have seen an actual STC that a owner obtained in the late 90s to make his Decathlon IFR legal, so it is (or was) theoretically possible at one point in history.
The pilot's operating manual for the '75 - '77 model years already contains the VFR only limitation: https://www.aerodynamicaviation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/CitabriaPOH.pdfHere is a hint...
View attachment 2759
The Type Certificate Data Sheet indicates the introduction of the Airplane Flight Manual in March 1979. I suspect the FAA requirements behind the need for an AFM may also have required the manufacture to demonstrate compliant operations in all of the different flight regimes, and the manufacturer simply chose not too, perhaps because of the need to equip a demonstrator airplane, and a belief that the market wasn't interested, which may well had been true at the time. The STC you mention probably just accomplished the demonstration for the FAA.
In my estimate, this falls into the realm of what the FAA now allows for field approvals assuming my above conjecture is indeed true, as all they would need to do is equip the airplane and demonstrate it in the IFR environment. This would be pretty straight forward and "simple" certification for one airplane. Procedurally of course there is the need to put the airplane in experimental category, provide the required certification deliverables including flight test reports, etc etc.
Good catch.The pilot's operating manual for the '75 - '77 model years already contains the VFR only limitation: https://www.aerodynamicaviation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/CitabriaPOH.pdf
Can't find the older Champion manual online, which states VFR, IFR with optional equipment ... Not sure about earlier Bellanca manuals pre '75
The FAA doesn't really like to do field approvals anymore, so the one time STC appears the avenue they forced him to take. This caused the STC owner to jump through more process hoops. It also documented the airplanes configuration, so what ever equipment the STC owner installed for IFR ops, is what became required by the STC.