Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Need IFR GPS WAAS Approach capability
- Thread starter skyyking
- Start date
625
Don,
Are you flying IFR with the 625 only? I'm still a little on the fence about IFR with GPS only, but I'm coming around. I guess I'm so old I can't give up completely on VOR/ILS. I'd love hearing from you re your decision.
Robert
RV7
Don,
Are you flying IFR with the 625 only? I'm still a little on the fence about IFR with GPS only, but I'm coming around. I guess I'm so old I can't give up completely on VOR/ILS. I'd love hearing from you re your decision.
Robert
RV7
Jesse
Well Known Member
It would be interesting to see a Poll on how many people have only IFR GPS capabilities with no NAV radio. I have this in my -6A (GTN-625 only). We had it in a -9A as well (400W only). The poll should also include the number of people who have NAV capabilities that never use it (except occasionally to verify that it works and they remember how). Obviously Garmin thinks it's valid because they offer e 625 for a special price with their G3X systems.
Oh, it would also be nice to see a list of airports with ILS capabilities that don't also have an LPV approach to the same runway. Methinks they are few and far between. There are many more airports that have one ILS and more than one LPV.
Oh, it would also be nice to see a list of airports with ILS capabilities that don't also have an LPV approach to the same runway. Methinks they are few and far between. There are many more airports that have one ILS and more than one LPV.
donaziza
Well Known Member
Hi Robert, I just got it. Its still sitting in the box here in my office. You're probably younger than me---I'm older than Yoda, but ILS's and VOR,s are going the way of my former pet dinosaur. Seems to be GPS approaches just about everywhere. But yeah, flying IF & R is the intention. ( If you have Garmin Pilot, and probably the same on Fore Flight, look at the IFR approaches almost anywhere. You'll see a GPS approach. You won't necessarily see an ILS or VOR) I've already got 2 comm radios in my cockpit with dual freqs on both, so its almost like having 4 radios. Didn't need a 430 or 650.
Last edited:
counter example
It's rare, but it does happen: x/c with ifr student, reported ceiling 200'. Saw the lights at 230', ILS got us in. LPV minimums were 300', would never have seen anything. Once in a while you're really happy to have an ILS. VOR, I'm not so sure.
Edit: another consideration, with just a WAAS GPS for navigation, you cannot take your ifr practical test, nor an IPC (although I have a work-around for this) in this airplane.
It's rare, but it does happen: x/c with ifr student, reported ceiling 200'. Saw the lights at 230', ILS got us in. LPV minimums were 300', would never have seen anything. Once in a while you're really happy to have an ILS. VOR, I'm not so sure.
Edit: another consideration, with just a WAAS GPS for navigation, you cannot take your ifr practical test, nor an IPC (although I have a work-around for this) in this airplane.
Last edited:
grubbat
Well Known Member
625 and SL30
I went with the 625 for approach GPS and Sl30 for ILS and com work. The GPS/com boxes like the 650 offer some advantages but not enough to for me to pay the extra. The SL30 is really hard to beat for VOR work and can be found used reasonable. Couple the 625 to a GPSS autopilot, and now you have icing on the cake.
I went with the 625 for approach GPS and Sl30 for ILS and com work. The GPS/com boxes like the 650 offer some advantages but not enough to for me to pay the extra. The SL30 is really hard to beat for VOR work and can be found used reasonable. Couple the 625 to a GPSS autopilot, and now you have icing on the cake.
I received a PM about this, but I think it's of general interest to ifr pilots. It used to be that IPC's content was left to the cfii. Then the FAA added an IPC column to the PTS tasks list. CFIIs pointed out that the PTS was a non-regulatory advisory circular which they didn't have to follow. So the FAA changed FAR 61.57(d) to specifically reference the PTS. This is another example (ifr gps being another) of the trend to put information in non-regulatory publications, then reference the publication in the FARs, making the information "regulatory by reference".
So yes, for an IPC, 3 different types of approaches need to be demonstrated.
So if we understand the rules correctly, (with respect to our RV-XX)... if you are IFR current and stay that way... you won't be doing an IPC and therefore GPS WAAS is good enough for IFR because you don't need NAV to enable the non-gps types of approaches to accomplish the IPC... GPS WAAS (for IFR) will be all that you need moving forward?
Thanx
Victor
This is correct.
Self-serving side note: There is a very real difference between being legally current (maybe 6 approaches to a 900' ceiling and good visibility in the last 6 months) and being actually proficient (say, a no-radar partial panel approach to 200' agl and then landing in 1/2 mile vis). Some pilots confuse the two.
OK, how about: LPV, LNAV/VNAV, and LNAV only?
I'll bet you $50 that your airplane is not equipped to do a LNAV/VNAV approach.
Hmmmm...my Garmin GNS430W manual says it will...p. 85 and p. 113 of the Pilot's Guide.
You're right - I should have said your equipment does not limit you to LNAV/VNAV ONLY. Some heavy iron use a non Waas gps plus a FMS plus altimeter to get lnav/vnav minimums (but not LPV mins). With a waas box you will normally get an annunciation for an LPV approach. You can always limit yourself to LNAV/VNAV minimums if you so choose.
But at any rate, the instrument PTS lists an LPV with 300' or less minimums as an acceptable precision approach, and all other gps approaches as an acceptable non precision approach. It does not list LNAV/VNAV at all.
humptybump
Well Known Member
It would seem the text is clear that two non-precision approaches and one precision approach may be demonstrated with an IFR GPS equipped airplane.
" ... performance of two of the following nonprecision approaches: very high frequency omnidirectional range (VOR), nondirectional beacon (NDB), global positioning system (GPS) without vertical guidance, localizer (LOC), localizer-type directional aid (LDA), simplified directional facility (SDF), or area navigation (RNAV) and one precision approach: instrument landing system (ILS), GNSS landing system (GLS), localizer performance with vertical guidance (LPV) or microwave landing system (MLS). GPS equipment must be instrument flight rules (IFR) certified and contain the current database."
Auburntsts
Well Known Member
The RNAV they are talking about there is the pre-GPS RNAV which is DME/VOR or INS based. That's why GPS without vertical guidance is specifically spelled out as one of the non-precision approach options.
Okay, if you need to do 3 approaches for the PTS or IPC, and you only have a WAAS IFR approved GPS with current database and NO Nav or other radio navigation equipment... the GPS (RNAV) is the non- precision approach... the LPV is the precision approach... What would be considered a third acceptable approach?? Isn't the GPS/RNAV approach the same? Can you give examples (approach plates) that may show more than 1 acceptable type of non-precision approach that the FAA has ruled is acceptable for a PTS/IPC?
Thanx
Victor
humptybump
Well Known Member
This may be a case of "so much information that there is confusing information".
From the FAA ...
If TSO-C129 equipment is used to solely satisfy the RNAV requirement, GPS RAIM availability must be confirmed
humptybump
Well Known Member
There are GPS approaches which are not RNAV approaches. Here is one example:
http://flightaware.com/resources/airport/CGE/IAP/NDB+OR+GPS+RWY+34/pdf
Auburntsts
Well Known Member
GPS is RNAV, but not the only RNAV. RNAV existed long before GPS entered into the mix. I standby my position that GPS can only be used for 1 or the 2 PTS required non-precision approaches.
IOW you can't do the GPS overlay approach you posted using GPS as the number 1 non-precision approach and then fly another RNAV (GPS) and count that as number 2. One of the non-precision approaches has to be done with a NAV system other than GPS.
IOW you can't do the GPS overlay approach you posted using GPS as the number 1 non-precision approach and then fly another RNAV (GPS) and count that as number 2. One of the non-precision approaches has to be done with a NAV system other than GPS.
Last edited:
jcaplins
Well Known Member
I believe these are your only choices when doing approaches on the long X-country requirement for the instrument rating:
NDB, LDA, VOR, LOC, SDF, GPS
A checkride or IPC may allow you to do a PAR or ASR. Maybe?
There is an advisory circular for substituting GPS for something else like an NDB or VOR. I haven't read through it, but maybe you can find a loophole.
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/90-108.pdf
Ah, the joys of the English language...imprecision.
I bet I could make the case that wording such as we have essentially means "two items chosen from the following types: A, B, C, or D", and as such, *could* mean the same type of item chosen twice, rather than two *distinct* types, each chosen once.
So: two non-precision GPS approaches, and one precision GPS approach.
That's just my interpretation, but then again, I was a math major, not an English major.
EDIT: Ah, but now I see the Note in the PTS:
This is PTS, though, for the initial rating. IPC rules may be different.
I bet I could make the case that wording such as we have essentially means "two items chosen from the following types: A, B, C, or D", and as such, *could* mean the same type of item chosen twice, rather than two *distinct* types, each chosen once.
So: two non-precision GPS approaches, and one precision GPS approach.
That's just my interpretation, but then again, I was a math major, not an English major.
EDIT: Ah, but now I see the Note in the PTS:
(Emphasis added)
This is PTS, though, for the initial rating. IPC rules may be different.
Last edited:
humptybump
Well Known Member
I was not my intent to detail this thread. It appears my digression has been one where, short of the judicial review, there are just too many variables of interpretation for a layperson like me to make a clear determination. Ultimately it is the FAA and not a pilot who has the final word on what is accepted.
Auburntsts
Well Known Member
I agree with that. Ultimately my advice is if you have limited equipment installed, that before taking a checkride or IPC is to contact the DPE for the former and the CFII for the later and discuss your airplane's equipment before committing to the ride in order to avoid any expensive surprises.
moosepileit
Well Known Member
With the death of many NDB approaches and Soon all but the FAA-selected VORs, To get three types it'll be an ILS, GPS and a non-precision dive N drive, right?
This makes little sense. If you have a generated profile/path or ILS GP, you use it.
Dive and drive is getting to be verboten in part 121.
I finish a mil flying dive and drive career in a year, and my part 121 jet does dandy LNAV/VNAV.
My -6 has an SL-30 only for nav. A 91B appeals to the cheapskate in me, but a 400 or 625 will go in one day even with the huge panel rework.
Rangr ads-b out, first. The VORs and ILS and Loc mins for the fields and alternates I'd use are fine for now. The GRT EFIS and Trutrak 385 tie in nicely.
A box with certified TAWS does get an insurance credit.
This makes little sense. If you have a generated profile/path or ILS GP, you use it.
Dive and drive is getting to be verboten in part 121.
I finish a mil flying dive and drive career in a year, and my part 121 jet does dandy LNAV/VNAV.
My -6 has an SL-30 only for nav. A 91B appeals to the cheapskate in me, but a 400 or 625 will go in one day even with the huge panel rework.
Rangr ads-b out, first. The VORs and ILS and Loc mins for the fields and alternates I'd use are fine for now. The GRT EFIS and Trutrak 385 tie in nicely.
A box with certified TAWS does get an insurance credit.
humptybump
Well Known Member
I don't know what is the definition of "limited equipment". I haven't flown an NDB in 20 years and I never flew with Loran. My local airport has had the ILS out of service so long the FAA dropped the NOTAM.
Auburntsts
Well Known Member
In the context of this thread I meant an IFR GPS navigator with no other type of Nav radio to support a checkride or IPC IAW the PTS.
humptybump
Well Known Member
... some days I just can't stop myself from getting into a pissing contest
