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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Ah, cool, thank you very, VERY much for posting those references.
The FAA's policy subject to ICAO membership doesn't make it regulatory, as the ICAO is a standards organization and holds no sovereignty. If a DOT organinzation outside the FAA, or a department outside the DOT, adopted those ICAO standards as regulatory, then the FAA would assume an indirect regulatory role - even so, the equipment requirement would be arguable (the equipment assumption is for the purpose of determining minima, not actual navigation, and regulatory equipment requirements are otherwise very precise). But, as far as I know, this is not the case. The second part describes Class I and Class II navigation, but doesn't spell out an equipment requirement either. On the contrary, it says that you don't automatically need equipment appropriate for the corresponding class of navigation. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Brien K. Meehan" wrote: Ah, cool, thank you very, VERY much for posting those references. The FAA's policy subject to ICAO membership doesn't make it regulatory, as the ICAO is a standards organization and holds no sovereignty. If a DOT organinzation outside the FAA, or a department outside the DOT, adopted those ICAO standards as regulatory, then the FAA would assume an indirect regulatory role - even so, the equipment requirement would be arguable (the equipment assumption is for the purpose of determining minima, not actual navigation, and regulatory equipment requirements are otherwise very precise). But, as far as I know, this is not the case. Indeed, ICAO is not regulatory. What the FAA accepts as navigation policy, though, is subject to FAA regulation, ala 91.205(d)(2); i.e. "appropriate." "Appropriate" serves to the benefit of the FAA, not the pilot. The second part describes Class I and Class II navigation, but doesn't spell out an equipment requirement either. On the contrary, it says that you don't automatically need equipment appropriate for the corresponding class of navigation. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Ron Natalie wrote: Mark Hansen wrote: You are also required to have available in the aircraft equipment necessary for navigation along your route, in the event GPS goes out. That sounds like VOR to me. Not if you have the right GPS. But an unchecked VOR is technically not airworthy, so unless you're going to follow the procedures for inop equipment, it would be easier just to do it. Not so. VOR is still the primary means of navigation in the NAS. Even the latest and greatest airline aircraft with dual GPS sensors, dual FMSes, triple IRUs, etc, cannot be dispatched without operate VOR receivers (in their case two). The presumption is that the GPS system can fail at any time; at least in a given area. WAAS doesn't mitigate that whatsoever. I thought that WAAS was approved for sole means of navigation? Mike MU-2 |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in
nk.net: I thought that WAAS was approved for sole means of navigation? Not that I'm aware of. WAAS has nothing to do with reliability, other than vertical accuracy. Its only function is to give enough vertical accuracy to allow a semi-precision approach. -- Regards, Stan "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
My understanding is that WAAS has an integrety function and is able to
detect an inaccurate signal. Mike MU-2 "Stan Gosnell" wrote in message ... "Mike Rapoport" wrote in nk.net: I thought that WAAS was approved for sole means of navigation? Not that I'm aware of. WAAS has nothing to do with reliability, other than vertical accuracy. Its only function is to give enough vertical accuracy to allow a semi-precision approach. -- Regards, Stan "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Not so. VOR is still the primary means of navigation in the NAS. Even the latest and greatest airline aircraft with dual GPS sensors, dual FMSes, triple IRUs, etc, cannot be dispatched without operate VOR receivers (in their case two). The presumption is that the GPS system can fail at any time; at least in a given area. WAAS doesn't mitigate that whatsoever. So why is it presumed that the VOR system cannot fail? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Well, okay, but I work with this stuff all the time. That doesn't mean you understand it. Here is from the current FAA Order 8260.19C: l. Dual Minimums. Enter dual minimums, when authorized. Do not publish dual minimums unless a 60-foot operational advantage is obtained or a reduction in visibility can be achieved. To avoid proliferation of dual minimums, *all IFR aircraft are assumed to have at least one VOR receiver*. Dual minimums based on a stepdown fix combined with local and remote altimeter settings could result in four sets of minimums. When two remote sources are used, treat the source resulting in lower minimums as the "LOCAL" altimeter setting source in the following paragraphs. Document only two sets of minimums. The combinations authorized are minimums with and without a stepdown fix; or minimums with local and remote altimeter settings. The words between the asteriks are reflective of FAA Class I navigation policy, which is a requirement to be a part of ICAO. FAA Order 8260.19C places no regulatory requirements upon pilots or the operation of aircraft. How are you doing with that reference for the timing tables on NACO charts being IAS? |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
So why is it presumed that the VOR system cannot fail?
I would assume (and I know the etymology) that VORs fail 1000 square miles at a time, and GPS fails 3,000,000 square miles at a time. Or, more to the point, there is more systemic redundancy in the VOR system. Jose -- Nothing takes longer than a shortcut. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Good morning or good evening depending upon your location. I want to ask you the most important question of your life. Your joy or sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good | Excelsior | Home Built | 0 | April 22nd 05 01:11 AM |
Legal question - Pilot liability and possible involvement with a crime | John | Piloting | 5 | November 20th 03 09:40 PM |
Question about Question 4488 | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | October 27th 03 01:26 AM |