If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
FSDO enforcement- GPS before effective date - which date to put in Aircraft Log for Part 43?
Everyone seems to agree that that FAR 43 requires a maintenance log entry
when updating the database. And everyone agrees that it is silly. What date do you put down for the maintenance ( I know the obvious answer - the date you did it)? If I update multiple planes this weekend with the database that will be effective in the middle of the week (Mar 16th) because it is more convenient to go to the airport on a weekend, is it smart to put I updated the databases before they are effective if they have an IFR flight before the 16th? I understand you can legally fly an approach with an expired database if the approach has not been modified since the last database revision. My understanding is you couldn't verify if the approach had changed until you wait close enough to the cycle data to get the paper charts and see if they changed anything. If they changed it on the future cycle and it affected your approach before the effective date (you can download 10 days ahead, before you receive the paper) could FSDO bring enforcement? I take the old cards home with me so I don't have to make two trips to the airport every update cycle. We had a courtesy safety inspection last year by FSDO and they went through every log and found things they thought could be done better. (multiple planes). Mostly nitpicking stuff. Never, did they mention the absence of GPS database entries in the maintenance log or on anyone else's plane on the field. I think the only way around it is to leave both sets of cards and make two trips each cycle. Now that is ridiculous! Ron A. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
FSDO enforcement- GPS before effective date - which date to put in Aircraft Log for Part 43?
And I just thought of one more thing.
What date and whose name is recorded in the maintenance log, if you just put the future effective cycle chip in the glove box and some other member plugs it in when it is effective? I programmed the cartridge days before effective. It seems the person who plugs it in would record in the log, not the programming person. The aircraft wasn't modified until it was plugged in. If I am required to verify the installation by turning it on with the new card am I supposed to take it back out and put the old one back in without logging the programming? I only care because the date is being written down in a maintenance log for someone else to be able to review. I don't know how to reconcile who really makes the entry in accordance with the FAR 43. Ron A. "Ron A." wrote in message news:YimQf.609842$084.124252@attbi_s22... Everyone seems to agree that that FAR 43 requires a maintenance log entry when updating the database. And everyone agrees that it is silly. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
FSDO enforcement- GPS before effective date - which date toput in Aircraft Log for Part 43?
Ron A. wrote:
Everyone seems to agree that that FAR 43 requires a maintenance log entry when updating the database. And everyone agrees that it is silly. What date do you put down for the maintenance ( I know the obvious answer - the date you did it)? If I update multiple planes this weekend with the database that will be effective in the middle of the week (Mar 16th) because it is more convenient to go to the airport on a weekend, is it smart to put I updated the databases before they are effective if they have an IFR flight before the 16th? GNS480 makes it easy. You can update the database before the effective date, both the current and future databases are stored on the card, and the GNS480 automatically switches to the new database on the effective date. I haven't been around and the precise moment when it switches to know whether the switching disrupts a flight in progress. I understand you can legally fly an approach with an expired database if the approach has not been modified since the last database revision. My That's true only if your Approved Flight Manual Supplement permits it. Believe it or not, they're not all the same. If you have a UPS/Garmin-AT, the boilerplate FMS they shipped you, and you probably sent off to OK City without modifying it, and OK City approved without modifying it, allows you to fly an approach if you verify it is unchanged. OTOH if you have a Garmin(not-AT) the boilerplate that they shipped to you, and you probably sent off to OK City withoutodifying it, and OK City approved without modifying it, requires you to have a current data base. Not sure what happens with other brands. Also not sure if you could have modified the boilerplate and had it approved. understanding is you couldn't verify if the approach had changed until you wait close enough to the cycle data to get the paper charts and see if they changed anything. If they changed it on the future cycle and it affected your approach before the effective date (you can download 10 days ahead, before you receive the paper) could FSDO bring enforcement? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
FSDO enforcement- GPS before effective date - which date to put in Aircraft Log for Part 43?
"Ron A." wrote in message news:YimQf.609842$084.124252@attbi_s22... Everyone seems to agree that that FAR 43 requires a maintenance log entry when updating the database. And everyone agrees that it is silly. What date do you put down for the maintenance ( I know the obvious answer - the date you did it)? If I update multiple planes this weekend with the database that will be effective in the middle of the week (Mar 16th) because it is more convenient to go to the airport on a weekend, is it smart to put I updated the databases before they are effective if they have an IFR flight before the 16th? I understand you can legally fly an approach with an expired database if the approach has not been modified since the last database revision. My understanding is you couldn't verify if the approach had changed until you wait close enough to the cycle data to get the paper charts and see if they changed anything. If they changed it on the future cycle and it affected your approach before the effective date (you can download 10 days ahead, before you receive the paper) could FSDO bring enforcement? I take the old cards home with me so I don't have to make two trips to the airport every update cycle. We had a courtesy safety inspection last year by FSDO and they went through every log and found things they thought could be done better. (multiple planes). Mostly nitpicking stuff. Never, did they mention the absence of GPS database entries in the maintenance log or on anyone else's plane on the field. I think the only way around it is to leave both sets of cards and make two trips each cycle. Now that is ridiculous! FWIW, you can put the new card in the KLN-94 before the effective date. The old data will be used until the effective date. If you are using it at 0000 UTC on the effective date (6pm CST) it will give you a message, telling you to power off and back on to use the new data. -- Cheers, John Clonts Temple, Texas N7NZ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
FSDO enforcement- GPS before effective date - which date to put in Aircraft Log for Part 43?
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 19:13:17 +0000, Peter
wrote: "John Clonts" wrote FWIW, you can put the new card in the KLN-94 before the effective date. The old data will be used until the effective date. If you are using it at 0000 UTC on the effective date (6pm CST) it will give you a message, telling you to power off and back on to use the new data. How does this work? Does the KLN94 have enough internal FLASH to store a copy of the complete previous CF FLASH card? Does each CF card contains two sets of data; one old and one new? No documentation to support the view, but I believe the KLN94 has enough internal flash to hold two sets of data. It checks the card inserted into the unit and downloads it to internal if the card doesn't have the same (whatever they compare) as the internal data. When it comes time, the unit then swaps over to whichever bank of flash it needs uses depending on effective date (or just whatever has the newest effective date if everything onboard has expired). |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
FSDO enforcement- GPS before effective date - which date to put in Aircraft Log for Part 43?
"Peter Clark" wrote in message ... On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 19:13:17 +0000, Peter wrote: "John Clonts" wrote FWIW, you can put the new card in the KLN-94 before the effective date. The old data will be used until the effective date. If you are using it at 0000 UTC on the effective date (6pm CST) it will give you a message, telling you to power off and back on to use the new data. How does this work? Does the KLN94 have enough internal FLASH to store a copy of the complete previous CF FLASH card? Does each CF card contains two sets of data; one old and one new? No documentation to support the view, but I believe the KLN94 has enough internal flash to hold two sets of data. It checks the card inserted into the unit and downloads it to internal if the card doesn't have the same (whatever they compare) as the internal data. When it comes time, the unit then swaps over to whichever bank of flash it needs uses depending on effective date (or just whatever has the newest effective date if everything onboard has expired). This agrees with my experience. The "downloads it to internal" step takes 5-10 minutes, but the "swap over to whichever bank" is just the standard power-on sequence (30sec or so)... John |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
FSDO enforcement- GPS before effective date - which date to put in Aircraft Log for Part 43?
John Clonts wrote:
FWIW, you can put the new card in the KLN-94 before the effective date. The old data will be used until the effective date. If you are using it at 0000 UTC on the effective date (6pm CST) it will give you a message, telling you to power off and back on to use the new data. Which, IMO, stinks. I was flying a night, IFR flight over Washington, DC, airspace, being guided by GPS and the autopilot. Before you point it out: Yes, I got caught with my pants down. I didn't have a current VOR tuned as a backup. Upon acknowledging this message and rebooting the GPS, the GPS would not lock onto the required number of satellites, so suddenly the GPS was an overpriced paperweight. I switched the AP to HDG mode, quickly reached for my charts, identified my position on the chart, then tuned and twisted the navigable VOR station, but not before I drifted about a mile east of course. Once the VOR was up, I was able to get back on course and continue. The GPS finally came back on line about 5 minutes after the episode started. Needless to say I learned a very healthy lesson that night. -- Peter |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
FSDO enforcement- GPS before effective date - which date to put in Aircraft Log for Part 43?
Mark Hansen wrote:
Didn't you have to notify ATC about the loss of functionality? Couldn't they have assisted you with vectors until you got your back-up equipment set up? Recall that the aviation priorities place "communicate" third in line. The first two priorities were enough for me to correct the problem and I was able to get back on course within a minute or so of the GPS outage. Had my pants been further down around my ankles (had my charts been in the back seat, for example), then yes, I would have requested a vector. -- Peter |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
FSDO enforcement- GPS before effective date - which date to put in Aircraft Log for Part 43?
Mark Hansen wrote:
Is the GPS database going to expire and switch during this flight? Whoops, I missed this. It is not the GPS database expiring during flight, but rather it is the GPS database *becoming current* during flight that results in a power-off, restart GPS message. Be aware of the effective date of the database when putting a new card in the KLN94. -- Peter |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
FSDO enforcement- GPS before effective date - which date toput in Aircraft Log for Part 43?
On 03/14/06 10:07, Peter R. wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote: Didn't you have to notify ATC about the loss of functionality? Couldn't they have assisted you with vectors until you got your back-up equipment set up? Recall that the aviation priorities place "communicate" third in line. The first two priorities were enough for me to correct the problem and I was able to get back on course within a minute or so of the GPS outage. Right. I wasn't criticizing ... sorry if I came across that way. I was only thinking that getting vectors while working out the details might have lessened any pucker factor that may have been involved. Had my pants been further down around my ankles (had my charts been in the back seat, for example), then yes, I would have requested a vector. -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane Cal Aggie Flying Farmers Sacramento, CA |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!! | Eliot Coweye | Home Built | 237 | February 13th 06 03:55 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 1 | January 2nd 04 09:02 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | October 2nd 03 03:07 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 4 | August 7th 03 05:12 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | July 4th 03 04:50 PM |