![]() |
| 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 |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Roy Smith wrote: Paul Folbrecht wrote: I really still wonder about the whole thing and marvel at the fact that they'll expect me to navigate under IFR with this thing without a current database (I don't keep the DB current and there's certainly no reason at all they should expect that I do). Controllers are not pilots (some are, but it's not a requirement and most are not), and don't understand the nuances of things like GPS database currency. Putting "VFR GPS" in the remarks, while having no official legal significance, says to the controller, "I want to be given direct clearances". You ask for them, he'll give then to you. Then it's up to you to decide if you can safely execute them. If you can't, say, "unable", and he'll come up with a different clearance. FWIW it has been my understanding that ATC cannot legally assign you "direct" to some fix you cannot navigate to using the equipment suffix you've filed with; if you file /U or /A you can't be expected to navigate directly to a fix not defined by VORs. Of course it is YOUR responsibility to figure out what you can navigate to, and to tell ATC you're "unable" if ATC tries to clear you somewhere that would require use of a GPS; a VFR hand-held GPS is irrelevant as far as "official" navigation is concerned. That said, I've also understood that adding "VFR GPS" in the remarks might encourage ATC to give assign you a HEADING somewhere, maybe with "direct when able" or something, on the assumption that with the aid of your VFR GPS you'll be able to head somewhere with surprising accuracy, which helps everyone. You could also ask for "Radar vectors" to somewhere, perhaps as in "request heading 242 degrees, radar vectors FUBAR"; with "VFR GPS" in the remarks ATC might go along, assuming you'll end up making a nice beeline for FUBAR. Officially you're on Radar Vectors and ATC retains responsibility for you; in practice you're no added trouble because you can head somewhere better than without your "VFR GPS" on board. That's the reason I've always understood for "VFR GPS ON BOARD" and why I occasionally specify it filing IFR. Cheers, -Patrick. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Clearance: Direct to airport with /U | Judah | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | February 27th 04 07:02 PM |
| Direct To a waypoint in flightplan on Garmin 430 | Andrew Gideon | Instrument Flight Rules | 21 | February 18th 04 02:31 AM |
| "Direct when able" | Mitchell Gossman | Instrument Flight Rules | 18 | October 21st 03 02:19 AM |
| Filing direct | John Harper | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | October 9th 03 11:23 AM |
| Don Brown and lat-long | Bob Gardner | Instrument Flight Rules | 30 | September 29th 03 04:24 AM |