What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

IFR ticket without NAV

Aluminum

Well Known Member
Could one complete the entire IFR training and checkride without a NAV radio?

As in, an RV with only a 625 or 355 Garmin. Would e.g. "GPS", "GPS circling" and "LPV" count as "three different approaches" to satisfy the FAR?
 
For reference:

This is from the Instrument ACS:

"Task B. Precision Approach
The applicant must accomplish a precision approach to the decision altitude (DA) using aircraft navigational equipment for centerline and vertical guidance in simulated or actual instrument conditions. Acceptable instrument approaches for this part of the practical test are the ILS and GLS. In addition, if the installed equipment and database is current and qualified for IFR flight and approaches to LPV minima, an LPV minima approach can be flown to demonstrate precision approach proficiency if the LPV DA is equal to or less than 300 feet HAT."

In other words, you can substitute an LPV IF you have an IFR navigator with current DB and the LPV minimums are less than or equal to 300 above HAT...so not only does the equipment have to comply but the approach does, as well...
 
My reading of the rules, as found in the preface to the former PTS, now ACS, is ‘no’. This preface says the examiner is to choose ‘3 different types of approaches’, then lists the acceptable ones. The differences are in the underlying nav aids, not whether the procedure is straight in or circle to land. Now, having said that, I know some examiners are willing to count one LNAV and one LPV to 400’ or greater minimums as two non-precision approaches, and one LPV to 300’ or less as a precision approach, all three ‘different’. So really you need to check with the examiner you intend to use.
BTW, CFII’s giving IPCs are bound by the same rules. I work around that (if the airplane has only gps) by simulating a gps failure - I hand the pilot my handheld nav radio and ask for a vor approach. If you have a DPE who insists on different nav approaches, ask him if this is acceptable to him.
 
Last edited:
Task A. Nonprecision Approach
The evaluator will select nonprecision approaches representative of the type that the applicant is likely to use. The choices must use at least two different types of navigational aids.


This is the ACS quote. My interpretation is that ?gps? is one type of nav aid, so only one approach using gps is allowed. The second is supposed to use a different nav aid. But, as I said, some DPE?s put a different interpretation on this.
 
I think of the issues is in Appendix 7 page A-16 “Task A. Nonprecision Approach The evaluator will select nonprecision approaches representative of the type that the applicant is likely to use. The choices must use at least two different types of navigational aids."

If you are being picky GPS is only one type of navigational aid, but in my opinion VOR and ILS are one type of navigational aid since they are both VHF nav aids so just GPS should count.
 
Yes

I trained in my RV with no NAV radio. Only WAAS gps. I did find a DPE that was willing to do my check ride. He said the LPV down to 200 feet would be fine for the "precision" approach
 
I trained in my RV with no NAV radio. Only WAAS gps. I did find a DPE that was willing to do my check ride. He said the LPV down to 200 feet would be fine for the "precision" approach

I think everyone agrees with that, as does the ACS. The issue is the "two different non-precision" approaches. What did he have you do for those?
 
Dan,
I know you asked specifically about the check ride. But the question extends to actual operation in IMC. How many backups, if any, are enough? You'll get answers to that question ranging from "legal minimum is enough" to "at least 2 props, 2 engines". I'd suggest that you make an as large as possible effort to educate yourself, get opinions from people you respect and trust, etc., and then make your own decision (remember, you're also deciding for any possible passengers) regarding how many backups are enough.
 
I know you asked specifically about the check ride. But the question extends to actual operation in IMC. How many backups, if any, are enough?

That is a question of a different nature: do I have the skill, experience and attitude to avoid entering conditions where I don't have an out in case of hardware failure. The answer, of course, will depend on the individual, their risk-tolerance and phase of the moon. For instance, I fly a BRS parachute, but will take higher risks because of its presence; does that make me a bad person? I don't think your question has an answer other than "Fly Safe, whatever that means to you."

My original question was more along the lines of why are FAA standards so woefully out of date and out of touch with reality. My next airplane will have two independent magnetometers and between three and five independent GPS/WAAS/GLONASS/Galileo/BeiDou receivers active at any time, two of which can drive the autopilot, and all but one survive total electrical system meltdown short of nucular EMP. Plus a handheld or two for COM/NAV backup, should it come to that. It will outperform and out-safetify every club airplane I ever trained in--the weak link is the fuel selector between the ears--but still it won't strictly satisfy the letter of the law for IFR training unless I string a LORAN/ADF lightning rod from the rudder to my posterior...sigh. I'll go pound some rivets now.
 
I think of the issues is in Appendix 7 page A-16 “Task A. Nonprecision Approach The evaluator will select nonprecision approaches representative of the type that the applicant is likely to use. The choices must use at least two different types of navigational aids."

If you are being picky GPS is only one type of navigational aid, but in my opinion VOR and ILS are one type of navigational aid since they are both VHF nav aids so just GPS should count.

The closest guidance I could find regarding what constitutes "different type of navaids" are two legal interpretations Glaser 2008 and Pratte 2012. Although a VOR and ILS localizer both operate on VHF, they each provide different information. I do find it interesting that they mention LOC and LDA as different types of navaids though.

Would you consider GPS/WAAS a different type of NAVAID from GPS? I think that might make for the best argument in favor of a GPS-only IFR training being possible/legal. If so, your two non-precision approaches could be an LNAV and an LPV with >300' minimums. And you could demonstrate a precision approach with LPV to ≤300' minimums.

When I first considered OP's question, I initially thought it would be absurd that any CFI-I or DPE would sign-off without and applicant practicing or demonstrating any type of VHF navigation or approaches. Then after thinking about it, I realized somebody probably said the same about me never practicing or testing with an ADF... Oh the times they are a-changin'.
 
Last edited:
in my opinion VOR and ILS are one type of navigational aid since they are both VHF nav aids so just GPS should count.

VOR and ILS are quite different. VOR and Localizer frequencies are intermingled, making it easy for us to believe they are essentially the same technologies. Yes, they both work in the VHF band, but that's about where the similarities stop. The VOR signal is actually quite a complex signal if we take the time to examine how it is modulated to achieve the desired navigation outcome. Localizer, on the other hand, is a much less complex signal involving modulation with two different audio tones.

Additionally, for an ILS to function as an ILS there's that other component that comes into play, the Glideslope. Glideslope frequencies are typically invisible to us as a pilot because they are paired with Localizer frequencies, thus the GS receiver is magically tuned for us when we select a Localizer frequency which has an associated Glideslope.

Saying that VOR and ILS are one type of approach is, I believe, a rather critical over-simplification. A VOR approach is a very different beast as compared to an ILS approach or even a non-precision LOC approach.
 
LOL! I'll bring paper charts and E6B to the checkride too! :D

I know one guy who had his charts on an iPad. Day of his check ride was hot, and half way thru his iPad overheated and quit. He was able to fish some paper charts out of his flight bag and finish.
 
No Nav

Would you consider GPS/WAAS a different type of NAVAID from GPS? I think that might make for the best argument in favor of a GPS-only IFR training being possible/legal. If so, your two non-precision approaches could be an LNAV and an LPV with >300' minimums. And you could demonstrate a precision approach with LPV to ≤300' minimums.

That's exactly what I did 2 years ago. I have no nav radio in my plane except a Sportys hand held
 
Back
Top