IFR use of handheld GPS

"Frank Ch. Eigler" wrote in message
...

Perhaps your scenario is self-contradictory. 91.205.d.2 appears to
require "... navigational equipment appropriate to the ground
facilities to be used ...". If you're filing to a far-away ground
facility (far away airport or navaid) that you don't have appropriate
nagivational equipment (super-duper VOR receiver or substitutable GPS)
to guide yourself to, you may be in violation right there.


I'm in full compliance with FAR 91.205 in that regard, I have two fully
functional VOR receivers aboard.

"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:

Perhaps your scenario is self-contradictory. 91.205.d.2 appears to
require "... navigational equipment appropriate to the ground
facilities to be used ...". [...]

I'm in full compliance with FAR 91.205 in that regard, I have two fully
functional VOR receivers aboard.

But those ordinary VOR receivers will do approximately nothing for
you, when flying direct to a faraway VOR they cannot pick up yet, thus
they are not "appropriate to the ground facilities to be used".

- FChE

On 05/08/06 10:39, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:

Perhaps your scenario is self-contradictory. 91.205.d.2 appears to
require "... navigational equipment appropriate to the ground
facilities to be used ...". [...]

I'm in full compliance with FAR 91.205 in that regard, I have two fully
functional VOR receivers aboard.

But those ordinary VOR receivers will do approximately nothing for
you, when flying direct to a faraway VOR they cannot pick up yet, thus
they are not "appropriate to the ground facilities to be used".

- FChE

I think the point is that no ground facilities are being used for the
direct-to part of the flight. You're assuming that he is using the VOR
receiver to go direct-to a VOR 1000 miles away, but he's already said
that he was using the GPS.


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

"Frank Ch. Eigler" wrote in message
...

But those ordinary VOR receivers will do approximately nothing for
you, when flying direct to a faraway VOR they cannot pick up yet, thus
they are not "appropriate to the ground facilities to be used".


They're fully appropriate when I'm actually using them.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

But those ordinary VOR receivers will do approximately nothing for
you, when flying direct to a faraway VOR they cannot pick up yet, thus
they are not "appropriate to the ground facilities to be used".

They're fully appropriate when I'm actually using them.

This rather Clintonian argument ("to be used" vs "I wish to use")
opens the door to kooky things like flying an ILS with a handheld GPS.
("Sure I have one on board, but the FARs don't say I have to USE it
...."), or ignoring monitoring instruments ("my engine oil temp may
have been at redline, but I don't have to LOOK at it").

A 91.13 citation would fit perfectly, should something go wrong.

- FChE

"Frank Ch. Eigler" wrote in message
...

Folks, take notice of the absurd lengths the true believers have to go to
justify their faith.




This rather Clintonian argument ("to be used" vs "I wish to use")
opens the door to kooky things like flying an ILS with a handheld GPS.
("Sure I have one on board, but the FARs don't say I have to USE it
..."), or ignoring monitoring instruments ("my engine oil temp may
have been at redline, but I don't have to LOOK at it").


How would it open that door? Why would anyone attempt to fly an ILS with a
GPS of any kind instead of the LOC and GS receivers? I've already pointed
out that I'm in full compliance with FAR 91.205, I have navigational
equipment appropriate to all the ground facilities that may be used.



A 91.13 citation would fit perfectly, should something go wrong.


Actually, it wouldn't fit at all. FAR 91.13 applies to operation of an
aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or
property of another.