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 |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
"Peter R." wrote in message ... I already did. A review of the thread indicates you haven't. |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:
"Peter R." wrote in message ... Yep, your lack of an intelligent response was already noted. Now you are repeating yourself. We all have our roles. You keep demonstrating idiocy, I'll keep pointing it out. Why is it idiocy? You never explained your reasoning. -- Peter ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
In article ,
Gerald Sylvester wrote: is no such thing as a 'VFR GPS.' It is just an 'other' GPS. It could be a Garmin Forerunner to a Garmin 396. As long as it is not certified, who knows where it falls between those. Now we all know the 396 is on the same level as a IFR-certified GPS but all those others leave a LOT of room for interpretation in the design none of which the user has access to (manufacturer proprietary). Feature implementations should be readily apparent. The bottom line with this debate is that RAIM is one of the key features that makes an IFR enroute and approach certified GPS so certifiable. RAIM is a verification mechanism, not simply a method of notifying the user when a signal is lost. In my opinion, there is no practical difference for enroute navigation between a panel-mount certified GPS and a hand held which is not certified. JKG |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
Tauno Voipio wrote:
There is one fundamental difference to other means of IFR navigation: It is impossible to test and approve the GPS signal. For the other NAVAIDs the station can be measured on ground and fly the measuring flights and compare the results with the specs in ICAO Annex 10, and that's it. RAIM plus many systems monitor GPS Ron Lee |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
Jonathan Goodish wrote:
In my opinion, there is no practical difference for enroute navigation between a panel-mount certified GPS and a hand held which is not certified. Yes there is. RAIM provided integrity. As long as no signal error exists (vast majority of the time) then your assertion is basically correct. Ron Lee |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
Peter R. wrote:
wrote: That accident was the result of the pilot's failure to fly the correct altitude. It had nothing to do with the type of GPS being used. Perhaps, but the reason for my reference to the accident in this thread was to support my point that the possibility exists for instrument-rated pilots to use a VFR GPS as the only means of navigation. It is unquestionable that this accident pilot did. Perhaps? Perhaps the VFR GPS shoved the yoke forward, causing him to bust the altitude? |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
Peter R. wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: "Peter R." wrote in message ... Yep, your lack of an intelligent response was already noted. Now you are repeating yourself. We all have our roles. You keep demonstrating idiocy, I'll keep pointing it out. Why is it idiocy? You never explained your reasoning. You must be new here. ;-) |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
One difference I have not seen mentioned is how the VFR GPS appears in
the scan and relates to the other instruments. I know having a permanently mounted, cable free installation where everything is always where it's supposed to be makes a difference in the usability of an instrument. This is one reason why I don't think we will ever see IFR certified handhelds. The installation is part of the certification. |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
"Ron Lee" wrote in message ... Yes there is. RAIM provided integrity. As long as no signal error exists (vast majority of the time) then your assertion is basically correct. How does RAIM provided integrity make a practical difference? |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
Jonathan Goodish wrote:
Feature implementations should be readily apparent. it certainly is but everything behind the scenes is not. This includes product design and stability, product serialization (product tracking), documentation for installation and servicing, etc. For instance, a certified IFR GPS will definitely require more testing during the design and release as well as during the installation than a non-certified unit. Is this apparent to the user, no, it is not. Gerald Sylvester |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|