Being asked to "verify direct XXX"

wrote:
Agreed.

What I am saying is that the radar might be unavailable for any number
of reasons AFTER the authorization to proceed direct is given.

In which case there is no reason to do anything different - just
continue to proceed direct.

The first you know of a radar problem will be when you get your new
nonradar routing.


What some people don't seem to get is that the regs require that
certain equipment be on board for IFR flight, , and once that is
satisfied, it doesn't prevent your using other equipment that might be
on board, even if it isn't "authorized". (handheld GPS, LORAN,
sextant, RadioShack stopwatch, handheld Tates compass, ham sandwich,
you name it)

Approved GPS is required for GPS operations. "Proceed direct" is not
a GPS operation.

It might be. I am in the camp that knows that VFR GPS's, installed or
otherwise, are not legal for IFR for navigating on a direct course. You
are not legal asking for or accepting "cleared direct" when you are /A.
Nor is the controller legal in giving such a clearance.

"Newps" wrote in message
...

It might be. I am in the camp that knows that VFR GPS's, installed or
otherwise, are not legal for IFR for navigating on a direct course.


What regulation is violated by use of a handheld GPS for navigating on a
direct course?



You are not legal asking for or accepting "cleared direct" when you are
/A.

What regulation is violated by asking for or accepting "cleared direct" when
you are /A?



Nor is the controller legal in giving such a clearance.


What paragraph of FAAO 7110.65 would be violated if a controller issued such
a clearance?

"Newps" wrote:
You are not legal asking for or accepting "cleared direct"
when you are /A. Nor is the controller legal in giving such a
clearance.

Horse hockey.

Newps wrote in news:r66dnfOMiNj6zPTfRVn-
:

It might be. I am in the camp that knows that VFR GPS's, installed or
otherwise, are not legal for IFR for navigating on a direct course. You
are not legal asking for or accepting "cleared direct" when you are /A.
Nor is the controller legal in giving such a clearance.

Cleared direct is certainly legal without a GPS if you are asking for
clearance direct to an intersection and you are on one of the legs...

There was a discussion that I was involved in some time ago (maybe almost a
year ago) that defined how one could even navigate direct to an
intersection off-airway with 2 VORs (or, more complexibly by flipping 1
VOR). Admittedly, since I fly in a flight club that has all IFR-approved
GPS units, I never learned the technique. But there is no legal restriction
in requesting or accepting a clearance that you personally can't handle, so
long as you have the proper equipment to be able perform the navigation.

Is it a bad idea? Maybe. But is it illegal? I don't believe so.