How long before /G required for IFR?

Michael wrote:

But, how much longer will it be before /G is a de facto requirement?

IMO, more than 5 years but less than 15.

Already when I fly IFR (filed /U) controllers give me instructions
("proceed direct foobar") that require GPS

Well, they don't really. I bet you can do that with the M1 LORAN. Or
you could if it didn't come with a placard limiting it to VFR use only.
A handheld GPS will not come with such a placard, and there's no rule
that says you can't use it for enroute IFR (anyone who says otherwise
is welcome to quote chapter and verse from the approriate regulation -
NOT an advisory circular or AIM).

Try 91.205 (d) (2) for starters:

d) Instrument flight rules. For IFR flight, the following instruments and
equipment are required:

(2) Two-way radio communications system and navigational equipment
appropriate to the ground facilities to be used.

Think non-radar operations, where the controller isn't going to play "Frick
and Frack" direct-to games with you. Failure to comply with 91.205 can
rapidly lead to 91.3, and the FAA attorneys win every time.

Paul Tomblin wrote:

In a previous article, Newps said:
A terminal/enroute only box allows you to eliminate your ADF and DME
which is very handy if you fly a lot of ILS and VOR approaches anyways.

Don't get rid of your ADF and DME if you want to fly to Canada some time,
though.

More so for Mexico.

In a previous article, said:
Where does it say I cannot accept this clearance and dead reckon my
way to this intersection?

This is something I've never understood. Before I was a pilot, I was an
orienteer (a pretty good one, too - 7th in the North American
Championships one year). And in the sport of orienteering, it's quite
common to take an approximate bearing to one linear feature, aimed off a
bit so you know which way to turn, and then follow the linear feature to
the point feature that you're looking for. And yet if you suggest to
another pilot that you could get to "so-and-so" intersection (which is the
intersection of two airways that you're not currently on) from here by
taking a 200 heading until you hit the airway, then turning down along the
airway until you hit the intersection, and they look at you like you've
grown an extra horn on your head.

Why don't pilots do approximate bearings like that? The only thing I've
seen close to that is when ATC will give you an approximate heading to a
VOR a long way away and say "fly 200 degrees, then direct ETX when able".

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
echo '16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sb20293A2058554E494Csnlbxq'|dc

"Dan Thompson" wrote in message
. com...
This is an old horse and I almost hate to bring it up again, but are you
aware you can legally accept direct FUBAR as a /U under IFR, and monitor
your progress with a handheld GPS?

It is a sad day that people now assume clearance direct to an intersection
can only be complied with if you have some sort of RNAV. Makes me wonder how
we ever did it in the '70s with only a VOR and a TACAN.

wrote in message ...

Try 91.205 (d) (2) for starters:

d) Instrument flight rules. For IFR flight, the following instruments and
equipment are required:

(2) Two-way radio communications system and navigational equipment
appropriate to the ground facilities to be used.


That states what equipment is required to be aboard, it does not restrict
the use of equipment not required to be aboard.



Think non-radar operations, where the controller isn't going to play
"Frick and Frack" direct-to games with you. Failure to comply with 91.205
can
rapidly lead to 91.3, and the FAA attorneys win every time.


Nobody suggested IFR operations without the required equipment.

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...

This is something I've never understood. Before I was a pilot, I was an
orienteer (a pretty good one, too - 7th in the North American
Championships one year). And in the sport of orienteering, it's quite
common to take an approximate bearing to one linear feature, aimed off a
bit so you know which way to turn, and then follow the linear feature to
the point feature that you're looking for. And yet if you suggest to
another pilot that you could get to "so-and-so" intersection (which is the
intersection of two airways that you're not currently on) from here by
taking a 200 heading until you hit the airway, then turning down along the
airway until you hit the intersection, and they look at you like you've
grown an extra horn on your head.


Well, "direct" is defined as straight line flight between two fixes. But
then a VOR receiver can be off by six degrees and still be used for IFR
operations. Go figure.

wrote in message
...

You had a VOR and a TACAN? Lucky dog.


I believe King made a version of the KNS 80 with full TACAN capability, I
think it was the KNS 80A.

Tim, some of the other guys are playing around with you a little bit, but
I'll spell it out for you since I started it.

That reg says what you have to have onboard, but does not say what you will
or must use for navigation. IFR course tracking is a performance standard.
You must stay on the assigned course. How you do that is not specified or
regulated. What you use to fly that course is not specified or regulated.
Only that you fly that course, somehow.

So, you may use dead reckoning if you want to, radar vectors, celestial nav
(right!), or even (the crowd is on the edge of their seats in anticpation) a
tuna sandwich. The tuna sandwich must not, however, be placarded "VFR
only."

So, it is perfectly acceptable to look at your handheld GPS, see that it
says 237 degrees and 16 minutes to FUBAR, dead reckon by flying a 237
heading, and monitor your progress by reference to the handheld GPS.





wrote in message ...


Michael wrote:

But, how much longer will it be before /G is a de facto requirement?

IMO, more than 5 years but less than 15.

Already when I fly IFR (filed /U) controllers give me instructions
("proceed direct foobar") that require GPS

Well, they don't really. I bet you can do that with the M1 LORAN. Or
you could if it didn't come with a placard limiting it to VFR use only.
A handheld GPS will not come with such a placard, and there's no rule
that says you can't use it for enroute IFR (anyone who says otherwise
is welcome to quote chapter and verse from the approriate regulation -
NOT an advisory circular or AIM).

Try 91.205 (d) (2) for starters:

d) Instrument flight rules. For IFR flight, the following instruments and
equipment are required:

(2) Two-way radio communications system and navigational equipment
appropriate to the ground facilities to be used.

Think non-radar operations, where the controller isn't going to play
"Frick
and Frack" direct-to games with you. Failure to comply with 91.205 can
rapidly lead to 91.3, and the FAA attorneys win every time.

"Dan Thompson" wrote in message
news

Tim, some of the other guys are playing around with you a little bit, but
I'll spell it out for you since I started it.

That reg says what you have to have onboard, but does not say what you
will or must use for navigation. IFR course tracking is a performance
standard. You must stay on the assigned course. How you do that is not
specified or regulated. What you use to fly that course is not specified
or regulated. Only that you fly that course, somehow.

So, you may use dead reckoning if you want to, radar vectors, celestial
nav (right!), or even (the crowd is on the edge of their seats in
anticpation) a tuna sandwich. The tuna sandwich must not, however, be
placarded "VFR only."

So, it is perfectly acceptable to look at your handheld GPS, see that it
says 237 degrees and 16 minutes to FUBAR,

There are GPS units that use minutes? I'd have thought them all to be
decimal format.



dead reckon by flying a 237 heading, and monitor your progress by
reference to the handheld GPS.


A good pilot will have an idea of the wind and correct for it.

wrote in message
...

Two, the placard "VFR only" means not approved for IFR operations. It
doesn't mean you are only allowed to use it when in VFR conditions.
Therefore it's as good as your sextant or stopwatch for navigation of
all kinds. As long as you have the required equipment on board, you
are all set.


The placard specified in AC 20-138 is "GPS limited to VFR use only". Use
of a GPS with such a placard during IFR operations, even on a cloudless day
with no restrictions to visibility, would be a violation of FAR 91.9(a).