Home > VansAirForceForums

- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

Old 12-13-2018, 04:14 AM
rzbill's Avatar
rzbill rzbill is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 2,579

Originally Posted by Mark_H View Post
I thought that's what my first thirteen words said?
Ah!. I think it is a matter of how one interprests the word "reasonable". Your reasonable could be closer to Bobs and mine than others interpretation.

Of course, the point is to plan for system failures such that one is left with a partial panel that will save your bacon. The alternative is not pretty. System failures happen. Done it.
Bill Pendergrass
ME/AE '82
RV-7A: Flying since April 15, 2012. 750hrs
YIO-360-M1B, mags, CS, GRT EX and WS H1s & A/P, Navworx
Unpainted, polished....kinda'
My RV Construction Page
Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2018, 01:37 PM
BobTurner BobTurner is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 5,711

Originally Posted by Mark_H View Post
........ (where a little more money gets a lot more function and ease of use)?
+1. My poorly expressed opinion was that,for me, I felt I needed to spend considerably more money for equipment that adds no function or ease of use — that is, unless my two main efis units, or 420W, fails. Then I’ll be really happy I spent the money.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2018, 01:47 PM
BobTurner BobTurner is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 5,711

Following up on a previous post: I have seen FAA guidance that, on an instrument checkride, an LPV approach to below 300’agl counts as a precision approach, while an LPV to above 300’ agl can count as a non-precision approach. And an LNAV approach is, of course, non-precision. Does this mean that doing an LNAV, LPV to above 300’, and LPV to below 300’, can be used as the 3 required approaches on an instrument checkride? Clearly some examiners say yes, while others say two LPV approaches don’t count as “...3 different kinds of approaches”. My reading of the ACS seems to support the latter. I’m looking for an FAA reference.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2019, 01:32 PM
GalinHdz's Avatar
GalinHdz GalinHdz is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: KSGJ / TJBQ
Posts: 1,717

Let me throw some gasoline on this fire.

1st "define your mission". If you are going to file and fly lots of actual IMC then you should seriously consider a multiple redundant system. If you will rarely fly actual IMC but want something to get you down if you encounter it, then a less redundant system will do. How much redundancy you need depends on your comfort level. Nobody here can decide that for you.

Now let me put my Nomex flight suit on.

FCC Radiotelephone (PG) with Radar Endorsement
2019 Dues Paid
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:40 PM.

The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.