IFR with a VFR GPS

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:


The presence of the GPS may be irrelevant to the cause of the accident,
but
it is completely relevant to my original point that a pilot may be tempted
to use a VFR GPS as the sole means of navigation, legal or otherwise.


That was idiocy

Yep, your lack of an intelligent response was already noted. Now you are
repeating yourself.

--
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
...

Yep, your lack of an intelligent response was already noted. Now you are
repeating yourself.


We all have our roles. You keep demonstrating idiocy, I'll keep pointing it
out.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Yep, your lack of an intelligent response was already noted. Now you are
repeating yourself.


We all have our roles. You keep demonstrating idiocy, I'll keep pointing it
out.

Why is it idiocy? You never explained your reasoning.

--
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
...

Yep, your lack of an intelligent response was already noted. Now you are
repeating yourself.


We all have our roles. You keep demonstrating idiocy, I'll keep pointing it
out.


Why is it idiocy? You never explained your reasoning.

You must be new here. ;-)

One difference I have not seen mentioned is how the VFR GPS appears in
the scan and relates to the other instruments. I know having a
permanently mounted, cable free installation where everything is always
where it's supposed to be makes a difference in the usability of an
instrument. This is one reason why I don't think we will ever see IFR
certified handhelds. The installation is part of the certification.

Doug wrote:
One difference I have not seen mentioned is how the VFR GPS appears in
the scan and relates to the other instruments. I know having a
permanently mounted, cable free installation where everything is always
where it's supposed to be makes a difference in the usability of an
instrument. This is one reason why I don't think we will ever see IFR
certified handhelds. The installation is part of the certification.


The TSO for IFR certification of the avionics and the installation
requires RAIM, auto CDI scaling, panel mount, display on the CDI or HSI
in the primary field of view (your point), demonstration that other
installed avionics will not interfere with the performance of the GPS
avionics, and a switch to select conventional nav or GPS to the primary
display.

A hand-held does none of the above. ;-)

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Why is it idiocy? You never explained your reasoning.


A non-idiot doesn't need an explanation and an idiot wouldn't understand
one.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Why is it idiocy? You never explained your reasoning.


A non-idiot doesn't need an explanation and an idiot wouldn't understand
one.

Reached the end of your intellectual limit, I see. Too bad, I used to have
some respect for you.

--
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
...

Reached the end of your intellectual limit, I see. Too bad, I used to
have
some respect for you.


An idiot has lost respect for me. I'm okay with that.