IFR use of handheld GPS

Newps,

By "the book" do you mean 7110.65R?
http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/index.htm

I was browsing this online last night and couldn't find the reference,
but that's hardly surprising given that it's the first time I've ever
looked at this tome.

Any chance you could provide a link or reference?

Many thanks,

Tim.

On Thu, 04 May 2006 16:01:11 -0600, Newps wrote:



Tim Auckland wrote:
Newps,

If using a hand-held GPS as a significant IFR navigation tool is
against the spirit of the FARs, surely the FAA could put an end to the
practice very simply by strongly discouraging controllers from issuing
Direct-To clearances to /A and /U aircraft

It's already there, the controller simply needs to read the book.



It doesn't appear to have done so, even though the debate has been
going on since at least 1998.

It's like anything else in the FAA, they don't care until you wreck
something. Then the FAA will buy part or all of your airplane when you sue.

Tim Auckland wrote:

Newps,

By "the book" do you mean 7110.65R?
http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/index.htm

I was browsing this online last night and couldn't find the reference,
but that's hardly surprising given that it's the first time I've ever
looked at this tome.

It's a ridiculous piece of work as you saw. If you could clear anybody
direct an equipment suffix would be unnecessary. It's also a shared
thing. I have my rules, you have yours. You have to be able to fly
what you file. You'd be suprised to find out how many operators file a
direct clearance as a /A or /Q and then say they need a vector. Even
when it is legal because they would be within the service volume.

You'd be suprised to find out how many operators file a direct clearance as a /A or /Q and then say they need a vector.

Well, one reason for that (at least on the East coast) is that it
doesn't really matter what you file, you will get something different.
So why bother figuring out a routing you won't use anyway.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:
You'd be suprised to find out how many operators file a direct
clearance as a /A or /Q and then say they need a vector.


Well, one reason for that (at least on the East coast) is that it
doesn't really matter what you file, you will get something different.
So why bother figuring out a routing you won't use anyway.


NORDO

Well, one reason for that (at least on the East coast) is that it doesn't really matter what you file, you will get something different. So why bother figuring out a routing you won't use anyway.
NORDO

That's not a reason. You will get a clearance, and you need to reject a
clearance you can't fly. But figuring out a route you won't get doesn't
address the route you -do- get.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Tim Auckland" wrote in message
...

By "the book" do you mean 7110.65R?
http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/index.htm

I was browsing this online last night and couldn't find the reference,
but that's hardly surprising given that it's the first time I've ever
looked at this tome.

Any chance you could provide a link or reference?


No, he can't, as there is no such rule.