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 |
#211
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
In article et,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: Peter R. said something that was idiotic. He doesn't realize it was idiotic because he is an idiot. OK, but you didn't answer my question, which was, "When idiots say idiotic things do you think that they realize that they are being idiots or do you think that they believe themselves to be completely correct?" I haven't said anything idiotic In the absence of an answer my question, your judgment on that particular matter is suspect, particularly in light of: Cumulo Granite is not a hazard. That seems pretty idiotic to me. rg |
#212
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
"Ron Garret" wrote in message ... OK, but you didn't answer my question, which was, "When idiots say idiotic things do you think that they realize that they are being idiots or do you think that they believe themselves to be completely correct?" I think they believe themselves to be completeky correct. In the absence of an answer my question, your judgment on that particular matter is suspect, particularly in light of: Cumulo Granite is not a hazard. That seems pretty idiotic to me. Why? |
#213
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
In article t,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: "Ron Garret" wrote in message ... OK, but you didn't answer my question, which was, "When idiots say idiotic things do you think that they realize that they are being idiots or do you think that they believe themselves to be completely correct?" I think they believe themselves to be completeky correct. OK. In the absence of an answer my question, your judgment on that particular matter is suspect, particularly in light of: Cumulo Granite is not a hazard. That seems pretty idiotic to me. Why? Because if you hit terrain (you were aware that "cumulo granite" is a euphemism for terrain, yes?) you are unlikely to survive. And if you survive you are unlikely to escape serious injury. And your airplane is likely to be totaled as well. That to my mind qualifies as a hazard. Isn't that obvious? rg |
#214
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
Ron Garret wrote:
Because if you hit terrain (you were aware that "cumulo granite" is a euphemism for terrain, yes?) you are unlikely to survive. And if you survive you are unlikely to escape serious injury. And your airplane is likely to be totaled as well. That to my mind qualifies as a hazard. Isn't that obvious? Familiar with that saying about wrestling with a pig? Last week, I wasn't. -- 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 =---- |
#215
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
"Ron Garret" wrote in message ... Because if you hit terrain (you were aware that "cumulo granite" is a euphemism for terrain, yes?) you are unlikely to survive. And if you survive you are unlikely to escape serious injury. And your airplane is likely to be totaled as well. That to my mind qualifies as a hazard. Isn't that obvious? That's all true, but it's true of all flight. The use of a handheld GPS for IFR enroute navigation in US controlled airspace is not going to cause a mountain to appear in front of you or wrest control of the aircraft away from you and dive it into the ground. |
#216
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
The controller's attention might be elsewhere (have you never been sent right through a localizer?). That said, my Garmin 196 does warn me when it loses reliable reception, though it's not proper RAIM. Reliable reception is not equivalent to integrity. You can have great reception and one bad signal that drives your position off hundreds of miles. And yes it is rare (10E-5/hour). BUt aviation integrity is at the 10E-7 rate. Ron Lee |
#217
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
The use of a handheld GPS for
IFR enroute navigation in US controlled airspace is not going to cause a mountain to appear in front of you Well, actually it could. Any navigation system which tells the pilot he is in one place when he is actually in another, which is used by a pilot who is in IMC, could cause the pilot to place himself in a position from which a collision with a mountainous surprise is unavoidable. While it is true that the navigation system did not move the mountain, the effect on the pilot is the same. I suppose the real risk of using^H^H^H^H^Hrelying on a VFR GPS is not one of collision (this is a risk inherent in any navigation system) but one of paperwork. If a pilot uses an IFR GPS and it misleads him into a mountain of granite (or sandstone, or shale), the dead pilot can claim that the fault does not lie with him. OTOH, if relying on a VFR GPS causes him meet the same fate, a mountain of paperwork sufficient to delay his appearances at the pearly gates will appear before him. It may be that a VFR GPS which is clipped to the right part of the yoke will provide better guidance in and among ridges than an IFR ADF. But there is a risk, not present with an IFR installation of anything, that the highly accurate VFR GPS unit will fall off the yoke at the wrong moment, perhaps while outside of radar coverage, or on an approach. There is a risk (present in VFR and IFR units) that the data displayed is incorrect - it has happened in our aircraft (Danbury moved four hundred miles without giving any notice to Ridgefield); IFR units are (presumably, though only the manufacturer really knows) tested to higher standards. There is a risk that the pilot will be unable to maintain the more challenging scan required by certain VFR GPS "installations" and thus will end up elsewhere than where he thought he was. Outside of a radar environment, in hostle terrain, this could activate the ELT. As for relying on controllers to "nudge" the aircraft back on course in a radar environment, this would be true primarily in airspace controlled by Steven P. McNicoll, who mever nakes mistakes. Merely human controllers might, for any number of reasons incomprehensible to Steven, miss something, allowing the pilot's error to terminate the flight prematurely. Jose -- He who laughs, lasts. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#218
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
In article et,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: "Ron Garret" wrote in message ... Because if you hit terrain (you were aware that "cumulo granite" is a euphemism for terrain, yes?) you are unlikely to survive. And if you survive you are unlikely to escape serious injury. And your airplane is likely to be totaled as well. That to my mind qualifies as a hazard. Isn't that obvious? That's all true, but it's true of all flight. The use of a handheld GPS for IFR enroute navigation in US controlled airspace is not going to cause a mountain to appear in front of you or wrest control of the aircraft away from you and dive it into the ground. And there are no other possible ways to hit terrain? rg |
#219
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
"Jose" wrote in message news Well, actually it could. Any navigation system which tells the pilot he is in one place when he is actually in another, which is used by a pilot who is in IMC, could cause the pilot to place himself in a position from which a collision with a mountainous surprise is unavoidable. While it is true that the navigation system did not move the mountain, the effect on the pilot is the same. The controller will alert the pilot to the navigational error. The use of a handheld GPS for IFR enroute navigation in US controlled airspace is no more hazardous than being vectored. It may be that a VFR GPS which is clipped to the right part of the yoke will provide better guidance in and among ridges than an IFR ADF. But there is a risk, not present with an IFR installation of anything, that the highly accurate VFR GPS unit will fall off the yoke at the wrong moment, perhaps while outside of radar coverage, or on an approach. We're talking about enroute use, not approaches. If the aircraft is out of radar contact it will be routed via airways or within the usable limits of navaids. The pilot will be able to compare the GPS to his VOR or ADF to verify it's accuracy. The use of a handheld GPS for IFR enroute navigation in US controlled airspace is no more hazardous than use of VOR along airways. There is a risk (present in VFR and IFR units) that the data displayed is incorrect - it has happened in our aircraft (Danbury moved four hundred miles without giving any notice to Ridgefield); IFR units are (presumably, though only the manufacturer really knows) tested to higher standards. There is a risk that the pilot will be unable to maintain the more challenging scan required by certain VFR GPS "installations" and thus will end up elsewhere than where he thought he was. Outside of a radar environment, in hostle terrain, this could activate the ELT. The controller will alert the pilot to the navigational error. The use of a handheld GPS for IFR enroute navigation in US controlled airspace is no more hazardous than being vectored. If the aircraft is out of radar contact it will be routed via airways or within the usable limits of navaids. The pilot will be able to compare the GPS to his VOR or ADF to verify it's accuracy. The use of a handheld GPS for IFR enroute navigation in US controlled airspace is no more hazardous than use of VOR along airways. As for relying on controllers to "nudge" the aircraft back on course in a radar environment, this would be true primarily in airspace controlled by Steven P. McNicoll, who mever nakes mistakes. Merely human controllers might, for any number of reasons incomprehensible to Steven, miss something, allowing the pilot's error to terminate the flight prematurely. It is not an option, it is required of all controllers. If you can't trust the controller to perform his job as he is required to do you cannot operate IFR in controlled airspace. |
#220
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
"Ron Garret" wrote in message ... And there are no other possible ways to hit terrain? None that are caused by use of a handheld GPS for IFR enroute navigation in US controlled airspace. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|