![]() |
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 |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote: So if the AIM says that handhelds are not authorized for IFR navigation, there must be a rule somewhere, right? Not necessarily. The AIM is meant to contain information that is "good practice", not just regulatory information. The FARs are for regulation. If the AIM was also regulatory and only contained information already in the FARs, what would be the point of it? Yes, it's true that the AIM is "not regulatory". We all learned that and regurgitated it back on some private pilot knowledge test long ago. But, just because it doesn't cite chapter and verse from 14 CFR is no reason to completely ignore what it says. The paragraph in question is 1-1-19-d-1-(a): 1. Authorization to conduct any GPS operation under IFR requires that: (a) GPS navigation equipment used must be approved in accordance with the requirements specified in Technical Standard Order (TSO) TSO-C129, or equivalent, and the installation must be done in accordance with Advisory Circular AC 20-138, Airworthiness Approval of Global Positioning System (GPS) Navigation Equipment for Use as a VFR and IFR Supplemental Navigation System, or Advisory Circular AC 20-130A, Airworthiness Approval of Navigation or Flight Management Systems Integrating Multiple Navigation Sensors, or equivalent. Equipment approved in accordance with TSO-C115a does not meet the requirements of TSO-C129. Visual flight rules (VFR) and hand-held GPS systems are not authorized for IFR navigation, instrument approaches, or as a principal instrument flight reference. During IFR operations they may be considered only an aid to situational awareness. While the AIM may not be regulatory, it also doesn't lie. When a simple declaratory statement is made such as, "hand-held GPS systems are not authorized for IFR navigation, instrument approaches, or as a principal instrument flight reference", it's a pretty good guess that there is some regulation, somewhere that backs that up. Anybody who feels confident enough that handheld GPS is good enough for IFR is welcome to invite an FSDO guy to ride along with you for an inspection with a handheld as your sole means of IFR navigation outside of DR, vectors, celestial, and a ham sandwich. See how far you get. Then please post about it so we can all share in your experience. Until that time, all this talk about how the AIM is not regulatory and how it's OK to fly IFR with a handheld is just a lot of masturbation. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
HANDHELD RADIO | [email protected] | Soaring | 22 | March 17th 16 03:16 PM |
Navcom - handheld VS panel ? | [email protected] | Home Built | 10 | October 31st 05 08:08 PM |
GPS Handheld | Kai Glaesner | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | November 16th 04 04:01 PM |
Upgrade handheld GPS, or save for panel mount? | [email protected] | Owning | 7 | March 8th 04 03:33 PM |
Ext antenna connection for handheld radio | Ray Andraka | Owning | 7 | March 5th 04 01:10 PM |