IFR with a VFR GPS

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

If the pilot were using the unit for primary navigation in IMC and the
unit
did not warn the pilot of too few satellites to be able to calculate
position, would that be a problem?


No.

Why?

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Why?


Because the properties of a "problem" are not present. Do you disagree? If
so, why?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Why?


Because the properties of a "problem" are not present.
snip

Primary navigation (the VFR GPS) is no longer reliable, the aircraft is
IMC, and the pilot is unaware that the unit is no longer reliable. Those
are not properties of a problem?




--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Primary navigation (the VFR GPS) is no longer reliable, the aircraft is
IMC, and the pilot is unaware that the unit is no longer reliable. Those
are not properties of a problem?


I don't think so. If the aircraft drifts off course the controller will
nudge it back and the pilot will then be aware that the unit is no longer
reliable. No problem.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Primary navigation (the VFR GPS) is no longer reliable, the aircraft is
IMC, and the pilot is unaware that the unit is no longer reliable. Those
are not properties of a problem?


I don't think so. If the aircraft drifts off course the controller will
nudge it back and the pilot will then be aware that the unit is no longer
reliable. No problem.

Assuming the aircraft is in controlled airspace. What if it isn't?

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Peter R." wrote:

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Primary navigation (the VFR GPS) is no longer reliable, the aircraft is
IMC, and the pilot is unaware that the unit is no longer reliable. Those
are not properties of a problem?


I don't think so. If the aircraft drifts off course the controller will
nudge it back and the pilot will then be aware that the unit is no longer
reliable. No problem.

Assuming the aircraft is in controlled airspace. What if it isn't?

Sorry, I mean assuming the aircraft is in radar contact.

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Sorry, I mean assuming the aircraft is in radar contact.


Radar monitoring is required for off-airways routes beyond navaid
altitude/distance limits. So if not in radar contact your route will be via
airways or between navaids within the established limits. You'll know the
VFR GPS is unreliable when it no longer agrees with your more traditional
navigation radios.

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Assuming the aircraft is in controlled airspace. What if it isn't?


We're not assuming the aircraft is in controlled airspace, we know it is.
That was established in the original message.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Primary navigation (the VFR GPS) is no longer reliable, the aircraft is
IMC, and the pilot is unaware that the unit is no longer reliable. Those
are not properties of a problem?
I don't think so. If the aircraft drifts off course the controller will
nudge it back and the pilot will then be aware that the unit is no longer
reliable. No problem.

But chewing up TONS of radio time becomes a problem for all aircraft.
On another thread, you argued that saying the extra zero for runway
zero-nine takes up time. Now we're talking about taking up probably
minutes of time. that I see as a problem especially if the controller
then gives a clearance direct to a VOR/NDB that is not within range or
is not in the database. That chews up serious amounts of more airtime.
I've read many reports of controllers getting ****ed at pilots for
not having waypoints in their certified GPS. I can only imagine
what happens when pilot has nothing in their "database" other than a
few points. For the pilot with the VFR GPS, your primary navigation
becomes radar vectors. I'd rather know where I am at ALL time rather
than depending on a controller. I know of one pilot getting RV in IMC,
controller forgot about him and augered it in (CFIT).

I can definitely see how a VFR GPS is useful when flying enroute and VMC
with loads of VOR's for use as a backup (err, primary navigation). To
do it, single pilot, in IMC, just has many single point failures or
where you have backups but requires a lot of work to get positively
established/stabilized again.

Gerald Sylvester

"Gerald Sylvester" wrote:

I've read many reports of controllers getting ****ed at pilots for
not having waypoints in their certified GPS. I can only imagine
what happens when pilot has nothing in their "database" other than a
few points.

??

What waypoints are found in my certified KLN 90-B that aren't found in
my 396?

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM