Flight plan equipment suffix

"abripl" wrote in message
oups.com...

I have no reason not to use it.... I use it all the time - just not for
IFR since I am not IFR rated. But from the comments I see that I can
continue indicating /G for my VFR flights even if the GPS data is not
current. So I think my question was essentially answered.


The AIM doesn't even mention filing an equipment suffix for a VFR flight
plan. For block 3 of the flight plan form it says only, "Enter the
designator for the aircraft, or if unknown, consult an FSS briefer." For
IFR flight plans it says, "It is recommended that pilots file the maximum
transponder or navigation capability of their aircraft in the equipment
suffix. This will provide ATC with the necessary information to utilize all
facets of navigational equipment and transponder capabilities available."

Visual Flight Rules

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Michael Ware" wrote in message
m...

What is relevant here is that the OP has stated that he is VFR only. He
cannot use the GPS for his primary means of navigation, regardless of
the
make/model of the GPS, the status of the database, or what equipment
suffix
he uses when he files.


Why not?

FAR 91 does not require equipment suffix either for VFR or IFR. In your
above quote (reference?) it says "recommended" (not "required") in
order for ATC to have more info for the IFR flight since ATC is more
likely to deal with IFR than VFR. Nowhere it says that equipment suffix
for VFR is not required or not recommended or forbiden. FAR 91 does
mention use of "full blown IFR GPS" for VFR use. When ATC does deal
with VFR the suffix may be helpful - as was in my one case with a
briefer.

"Michael Ware" wrote in message
m...

Visual Flight Rules


He cannot use the GPS for his primary means of navigation, regardless of the
make/model of the GPS, the status of the database, or what equipment suffix
he uses when he files, because he's operating under Visual Flight Rules?
What are you basing that on?

"abripl" wrote in message
oups.com...

FAR 91 does not require equipment suffix either for VFR or IFR. In your
above quote (reference?) it says "recommended" (not "required") in
order for ATC to have more info for the IFR flight since ATC is more
likely to deal with IFR than VFR. Nowhere it says that equipment suffix
for VFR is not required or not recommended or forbiden.


Correct.



FAR 91 does
mention use of "full blown IFR GPS" for VFR use.


Where?



When ATC does deal
with VFR the suffix may be helpful - as was in my one case with a
briefer.


ATC does not have any briefers.

FAR 91 does
mention use of "full blown IFR GPS" for VFR use.

Where?

Its actually in AIM 1-1-19-b-1 "...GPS navigation under VFR are varied,
from a full IFR installation..."

"abripl" wrote in message
oups.com...

Its actually in AIM 1-1-19-b-1 "...GPS navigation under VFR are varied,
from a full IFR installation..."


I don't see "full blown IFR GPS" anywhere in that subparagraph.

You heard of paraphrase?


Last person making comments wins.

You're right, substitute the word 'sole' for 'primary'.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Michael Ware" wrote in message
m...

Visual Flight Rules


He cannot use the GPS for his primary means of navigation, regardless of
the
make/model of the GPS, the status of the database, or what equipment
suffix
he uses when he files, because he's operating under Visual Flight Rules?
What are you basing that on?

"abripl" wrote in message
ups.com...

You heard of paraphrase?


What is the purpose of quotation marks?