Is your IFR GPS still legal for use?

On Fri, 25 May 2007 17:43:32 -0400, "Mark T. Dame"
wrote:

I can't think of a single situation where it wouldn't, under normal
operating conditions.


I was being polite. G

In article , "Mark T. Dame"
wrote:

B A R R Y wrote:
Roy Smith wrote:

But it's legal to fly those very same approaches with a 30 year old
ADF which points vaguely in the direction of either 1) the radio
beacon, 2) the nearest T-storm, or 3) some other random propagation
anomaly, and an equally ancient DME which is doing good if it's
correct to within 1/4 mile. Gotta love the FAA.

I always wondered the same thing.

You'd think a 196 on the yoke would outperform the ADF is some situations.

I can't think of a single situation where it wouldn't, under normal
operating conditions.

You can't get the ball score on the 196.

On May 25, 4:43 pm, "Mark T. Dame" wrote:
B A R R Y wrote:

Roy Smith wrote:

But it's legal to fly those very same approaches with a 30 year old
ADF which points vaguely in the direction of either 1) the radio
beacon, 2) the nearest T-storm, or 3) some other random propagation
anomaly, and an equally ancient DME which is doing good if it's
correct to within 1/4 mile. Gotta love the FAA.

I always wondered the same thing.

You'd think a 196 on the yoke would outperform the ADF is some situations.

I can't think of a single situation where it wouldn't, under normal
operating conditions.


I can.

The 196 cannot pick up AM broadcast radio stations and play them thru
your audio panel.

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

But it's legal to fly those very same approaches with a 30 year old ADF
which points vaguely in the direction of either 1) the radio beacon, 2)
the
nearest T-storm, or 3) some other random propagation anomaly, and an
equally ancient DME which is doing good if it's correct to within 1/4
mile.
Gotta love the FAA. A fine example of why getting all the government
you've paid for is a bad thing.


You can't substitute GPS for ADF on an NDB approach.

Recently, Steven P. McNicoll posted:

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

But it's legal to fly those very same approaches with a 30 year old
ADF which points vaguely in the direction of either 1) the radio
beacon, 2) the
nearest T-storm, or 3) some other random propagation anomaly, and an
equally ancient DME which is doing good if it's correct to within 1/4
mile.
Gotta love the FAA. A fine example of why getting all the government
you've paid for is a bad thing.


You can't substitute GPS for ADF on an NDB approach.

Of course not. If one did that kind of thing, they might actually arrive
at their intended destination.

Neil

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
t...
Recently, Steven P. McNicoll posted:

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

But it's legal to fly those very same approaches with a 30 year old
ADF which points vaguely in the direction of either 1) the radio
beacon, 2) the
nearest T-storm, or 3) some other random propagation anomaly, and an
equally ancient DME which is doing good if it's correct to within 1/4
mile.
Gotta love the FAA. A fine example of why getting all the government
you've paid for is a bad thing.


You can't substitute GPS for ADF on an NDB approach.

Of course not. If one did that kind of thing, they might actually arrive
at their intended destination.

Neil


The reason the FAA have done this is set out in the AC it is to harmonise
with ICAO.

"This criterion is consistent with the ICAO guidance material for the
implementation of area navigation (RNAV 1 and RNAV 2) operations. AC 90-100
became effective 7 January 2005. Since then, ICAO has continued to harmonize
area navigation (RNAV) performance criteria. AC 90-100A reflects these
harmonized ICAO performance-based navigation criteria as well as lessons
learned from the initial US RNAV implementation. "



US aircraft had real difficulty operating under IFR in Europe as AC90-96A
and JAA TGL -10 shows.

One of the reasons why Cirrus and the like have been having to fit ADF and
DME into their Europe bound aircraft.

Bob Moore writes:

The action means up to 26,000 GPS users no
longer comply with a 1996 FAA policy that allows GPS to be used in lieu of
ADF or DME.

If the FAA declares that all aircraft must be encrusted in diamonds to be
certified to fly, does the entire aviation world just roll over and spring for
the diamonds? What ever happened to checks and balances?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
news

If the FAA declares that all aircraft must be encrusted in diamonds to be
certified to fly, does the entire aviation world just roll over and spring
for
the diamonds? What ever happened to checks and balances?


Haven't you found a job yet?

On May 25, 2:03 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Bob Moore writes:
The action means up to 26,000 GPS users no
longer comply with a 1996 FAA policy that allows GPS to be used in lieu of
ADF or DME.

If the FAA declares that all aircraft must be encrusted in diamonds to be
certified to fly, does the entire aviation world just roll over and spring for
the diamonds? What ever happened to checks and balances?

You don't fly, fjukktafrd, it doesn't concern you.


Bertie

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Bob Moore wrote:
new GNS 480 WAAS receiver,

What's new about the 480? It's been on the market as the Garmin 480
(with WAAS and C146 certification) for nearly four years now and is
identical to the UPSAT branded units before that. There' has been
one whopping software revision in the interim (the one that fixes the
256 LPV approach limit).