IFR with a VFR GPS

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

I already did.


A review of the thread indicates you haven't.

"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 =----

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

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

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

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?

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. ;-)

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.

"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?

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