![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jose" wrote in message news ![]() Well, actually it could. Any navigation system which tells the pilot he is in one place when he is actually in another, which is used by a pilot who is in IMC, could cause the pilot to place himself in a position from which a collision with a mountainous surprise is unavoidable. While it is true that the navigation system did not move the mountain, the effect on the pilot is the same. The controller will alert the pilot to the navigational error. The use of a handheld GPS for IFR enroute navigation in US controlled airspace is no more hazardous than being vectored. It may be that a VFR GPS which is clipped to the right part of the yoke will provide better guidance in and among ridges than an IFR ADF. But there is a risk, not present with an IFR installation of anything, that the highly accurate VFR GPS unit will fall off the yoke at the wrong moment, perhaps while outside of radar coverage, or on an approach. We're talking about enroute use, not approaches. If the aircraft is out of radar contact it will be routed via airways or within the usable limits of navaids. The pilot will be able to compare the GPS to his VOR or ADF to verify it's accuracy. The use of a handheld GPS for IFR enroute navigation in US controlled airspace is no more hazardous than use of VOR along airways. There is a risk (present in VFR and IFR units) that the data displayed is incorrect - it has happened in our aircraft (Danbury moved four hundred miles without giving any notice to Ridgefield); IFR units are (presumably, though only the manufacturer really knows) tested to higher standards. There is a risk that the pilot will be unable to maintain the more challenging scan required by certain VFR GPS "installations" and thus will end up elsewhere than where he thought he was. Outside of a radar environment, in hostle terrain, this could activate the ELT. The controller will alert the pilot to the navigational error. The use of a handheld GPS for IFR enroute navigation in US controlled airspace is no more hazardous than being vectored. If the aircraft is out of radar contact it will be routed via airways or within the usable limits of navaids. The pilot will be able to compare the GPS to his VOR or ADF to verify it's accuracy. The use of a handheld GPS for IFR enroute navigation in US controlled airspace is no more hazardous than use of VOR along airways. As for relying on controllers to "nudge" the aircraft back on course in a radar environment, this would be true primarily in airspace controlled by Steven P. McNicoll, who mever nakes mistakes. Merely human controllers might, for any number of reasons incomprehensible to Steven, miss something, allowing the pilot's error to terminate the flight prematurely. It is not an option, it is required of all controllers. If you can't trust the controller to perform his job as he is required to do you cannot operate IFR in controlled airspace. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|