Is your IFR GPS still legal for use?

AvWeb has an article in todays issue saying that only the GPS 400/500
series and G1000 are the only IFR certified navigators that are legal to
use.

On 5/25/2007 8:07:17 AM, john smith wrote:

AvWeb has an article in todays issue saying that only the GPS 400/500
series and G1000 are the only IFR certified navigators that are legal to
use.

Admittedly I didn't read the entire circular (I have a Garmin GNS430), but my
quick skim of it seemed to indicate that the non-compliant models are no
longer allowed to use GPS in lieu of ADF or DME, where that is applicable,
unless alternate instructions are provided by ATC. This would imply that for
home-grown RNAV approaches these units would still be legal. Did I interpret
incorrectly?

--
Peter

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Admittedly I didn't read the entire circular (I have a Garmin GNS430), but
my quick skim of it seemed to indicate that the non-compliant models are
no longer allowed to use GPS in lieu of ADF or DME, where that is
applicable, unless alternate instructions are provided by ATC. This would
imply that for home-grown RNAV approaches these units would still be
legal. Did I interpret incorrectly?


I didn't read the entire AC either, but I don't see how you or AOPA
conclude that use of GPS to substitute for ADF or DME is now limited in all
cases to the cited Garmin units. The subject of AC 90-100A is "U.S.
Terminal and En Route Area Navigation (RNAV) Operations." The AC says it
"applies to operation on U.S. Area Navigation (RNAV) routes (Q-routes and
T-routes), Departure Procedures (Obstacle Departure Procedures and Standard
Instrument Departures), and Standard Terminal Arrivals (STARs)." The AOPA
letter states, "Pilots have removed ADF and DME systems from their aircraft
and they will no longer have access to any conventional approaches that
require them." I can find nothing that suggests the previous approval to
substitute GPS for ADF or DME has been rescinded for IAPs.

I "tried" to read that AC... it is the biggest collection of gibberish that
the FAA has published in a long time. If anybody in the group needs a real
big headache, give it a shot, then report back to the group with your
conclusion.
Jim

In article ,
"Jim Burns" wrote:

I "tried" to read that AC... it is the biggest collection of gibberish that
the FAA has published in a long time. If anybody in the group needs a real
big headache, give it a shot, then report back to the group with your
conclusion.
Jim

some things to consider:

1) AC 90-100A only cancels 90-100. It doesn't cancel
AC 20-130A, for example, or any of the AIM.

2) The AC is for RNAV routes. This does not conflict with the
AIM paragraph on using an appropriately certified GPS installation
in lieu of a VOR, DME, or ADF for non-RNAV routes.

3) Historically, the FAA does not update advisory circulars that also
de-certify the airworthiness of existing equipment, including the
authorization to use it. If they did, the various alphabet soups and
aviation companies would NOT participate in developing new
standards, etc.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

john smith wrote
AvWeb has an article in todays issue saying that only the GPS 400/500
series and G1000 are the only IFR certified navigators that are legal to
use.

Not exactly what AvWeb said.....


Many previously IFR-certified GPS receivers might now be unapproved for
flying many instrument procedures due to recent FAA policy changes,
according to AOPA. On Thursday, the association said the FAA's Advisory
Circular 90-100A, issued in March, indicates that only three GPS models --
the Garmin 400, 500 and G1000 series -- are now legal. Other models made by
Garmin, including the new GNS 480 WAAS receiver, as well as receivers
manufactured by Chelton, Honeywell, Northstar, and Trimble are listed as
"noncompliant," AOPA said. The action means up to 26,000 GPS users no
longer comply with a 1996 FAA policy that allows GPS to be used in lieu of
ADF or DME.

Bob Moore

In article 28,
Bob Moore wrote:

john smith wrote
AvWeb has an article in todays issue saying that only the GPS 400/500
series and G1000 are the only IFR certified navigators that are legal to
use.

Not exactly what AvWeb said.....


Many previously IFR-certified GPS receivers might now be unapproved for
flying many instrument procedures due to recent FAA policy changes,
according to AOPA. On Thursday, the association said the FAA's Advisory
Circular 90-100A, issued in March, indicates that only three GPS models --
the Garmin 400, 500 and G1000 series -- are now legal. Other models made by
Garmin, including the new GNS 480 WAAS receiver, as well as receivers
manufactured by Chelton, Honeywell, Northstar, and Trimble are listed as
"noncompliant," AOPA said. The action means up to 26,000 GPS users no
longer comply with a 1996 FAA policy that allows GPS to be used in lieu of
ADF or DME.

Bob Moore

But it's legal to fly those very same approaches with a 30 year old ADF
which points vaguely in the direction of either 1) the radio beacon, 2) the
nearest T-storm, or 3) some other random propagation anomaly, and an
equally ancient DME which is doing good if it's correct to within 1/4 mile.
Gotta love the FAA. A fine example of why getting all the government
you've paid for is a bad thing.

Roy Smith wrote:

But it's legal to fly those very same approaches with a 30 year old ADF
which points vaguely in the direction of either 1) the radio beacon, 2) the
nearest T-storm, or 3) some other random propagation anomaly, and an
equally ancient DME which is doing good if it's correct to within 1/4 mile.
Gotta love the FAA.

I always wondered the same thing.

You'd think a 196 on the yoke would outperform the ADF is some situations.

B A R R Y wrote:
Roy Smith wrote:

But it's legal to fly those very same approaches with a 30 year old
ADF which points vaguely in the direction of either 1) the radio
beacon, 2) the nearest T-storm, or 3) some other random propagation
anomaly, and an equally ancient DME which is doing good if it's
correct to within 1/4 mile. Gotta love the FAA.

I always wondered the same thing.

You'd think a 196 on the yoke would outperform the ADF is some
situations.

If not MOST situations.

B A R R Y wrote:
Roy Smith wrote:

But it's legal to fly those very same approaches with a 30 year old
ADF which points vaguely in the direction of either 1) the radio
beacon, 2) the nearest T-storm, or 3) some other random propagation
anomaly, and an equally ancient DME which is doing good if it's
correct to within 1/4 mile. Gotta love the FAA.

I always wondered the same thing.

You'd think a 196 on the yoke would outperform the ADF is some situations.

I can't think of a single situation where it wouldn't, under normal
operating conditions.


-m
--
## Mark T. Dame
## CP-ASEL, AGI
## insert tail number here
## KHAO, KISZ
"Our aim is to show the essential elements of the language in real
programs, but without getting bogged down in detail, rules, and
exceptions."
-- The C Programming Language, Kernighan and Ritchie