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.

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.

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?

"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

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

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.


Well, in the case I was referring to, my KLN04 did not force me to
reboot at that moment, it just was letting me know that I would need to
reboot eventually to use the new cycle's data. It continued tracking
and using the old data just fine in the mean time.

Did yours actually force you to reboot at that moment? What kind of
GPS is it?

Cheers,
John

Oops, I meant KLN94, and I see elsewhere in the thread that yours is
the same.

John

John Clonts wrote:

Did yours actually force you to reboot at that moment? What kind of
GPS is it?

It was a B/K KLN94 (that is what we are discussing, right?) and this was
perhaps three years ago. Yes, the only option I recall was to reboot.

Have there been software updates since then that may have addressed this?
I wouldn't know since it has been about 2 1/2 years since I flew with that
brand and model GPS.

--
Peter

Have there been software updates since then that may have addressed this?
I wouldn't know since it has been about 2 1/2 years since I flew with that
brand and model GPS.

Yes, there has been a major software upgrade a year or two ago. It
appears they have eliminated that particular "gotcha" (of requiring an
immediate reboot when the new cycle becomes effective).

Cheers,
John