Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 18:13:32 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1952906@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.158.62.67; envelope-from=cfi@instructor.net
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_----------=_1175292234279152"
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: "Ron Galbraith" <cfi@instructor.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: FreeFlight

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--_----------=_1175292234279152
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Well, partially correct.  It doesn't matter what kind of GPS you have.=20
On an IFR flight plan(in controlled airspace) you cannot be on a direct
route in any non radar environment unless you are going directly to or
From a VOR and are within navaid limitations.  The ONLY exception is if
you are on a VFR on top flight plan (OTP).   You may meet the FAR's for
direct routing, but ATC has a little different rules.  You don't have to
worry too much about filing the correct routes because if you are going
into a known non radar area at your altitude, ATC will clear you via
Victor airways no matter what equipment qualifier you have.  Knowing this
information might help you at some point where you can just tell them you
will go VFR on top and stay on your route, or ask for a higher altitude
to stay in radar coverage.  Unfortunately, there are areas here in CO
where the minimum altitude for direct routes would be FL200, but the
minimum IFR altitudes are common to be 170 too.  Basically the ATC rules
state that you can only be on a direct route if you are being radar
monitored.  There are some more ATC rules that deal with GPS approaches
too that might seem to be different than the FAR's are telling you.  If
you want to look up the ATC bible, just search for the 7110.65 faa
manual.  It covers everything in terminal, enroute, military, you name
it, it's what the ATC guys have to use.  Oh, and dont forget you can't go
VFR on top above FL180.=20

Ron Galbraith
HPAT instructor - retired ATC

  Yes.  Even though one could file /G with a GPS with RAIM, one still
  had to obey Far 91.205(d)(2) - to paraphrase: 2-way radio and
  navigation equipment appropriate to the ground facilities to be
  used.  What that means is TSO'd GPS is usable as for navigation in a
  radar environment (appropriate ground equipment), but not as a
  primary in non radar environments - in the mountains - thus, one must
  have had VOR nav capabilities. TSO'd GPS with WAAS is sufficient as a
  stand-alone navigation system so that it may be used as a primary
  navigation system in any environment.

--_----------=_1175292234279152
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"


<div>
<br>
Well, partially correct.&nbsp; It doesn't matter what kind of GPS you have.=
&nbsp; On an IFR flight plan(in controlled airspace) you cannot be on a dir=
ect route in any non radar environment unless you are going directly to or =
From a VOR and are within navaid limitations.&nbsp; The ONLY exception is i=
f you are on a VFR on top flight plan (OTP).&nbsp;&nbsp; You may meet the F=
AR's for direct routing, but ATC has a little different rules.&nbsp; You do=
n't have to worry too much about filing the correct routes because if you a=
re going into a known non radar area at your altitude, ATC will clear you v=
ia Victor airways no matter what equipment qualifier you have.&nbsp; Knowin=
g this information might help you at some point where you can just tell the=
m you will go VFR on top and stay on your route, or ask for a higher altitu=
de to stay in radar coverage.&nbsp; Unfortunately, there are areas here in =
CO where the minimum altitude for direct routes would be FL200, but the min=
imum IFR altitudes are common to be 170 too.&nbsp; Basically the ATC rules =
state that you can only be on a direct route if you are being radar monitor=
ed.&nbsp; There are some more ATC rules that deal with GPS approaches too t=
hat might seem to be different than the FAR's are telling you.&nbsp; If you=
 want to look up the ATC bible, just search for the 7110.65 faa manual.&nbs=
p; It covers everything in terminal, enroute, military, you name it, it's w=
hat the ATC guys have to use.&nbsp; Oh, and dont forget you can't go VFR on=
 top above FL180.&nbsp; <br><br>Ron Galbraith<br>HPAT instructor - retired =
ATC<br><blockquote style=3D"border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin=
-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;"><font id=3D"role_document" color=3D"#000000=
" face=3D"Arial" size=3D"2"><div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Yes.&nbsp; Even though one could file /G with a GPS with RAIM, one sti=
ll=20
had to obey Far 91.205(d)(2) - to paraphrase: 2-way radio and navigation=20
equipment appropriate to the <u>ground</u> facilities to be used.&nbsp; Wha=
t=20
that means is TSO'd GPS&nbsp;is usable as for navigation in a radar environ=
ment=20
(appropriate ground equipment), but not as a primary in non radar environme=
nts -=20
in the mountains - thus, one must have had VOR nav capabilities.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>TSO'd GPS with WAAS is sufficient as a stand-alone navigation system s=
o=20
that it may be used as a primary navigation system in any environment.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div><br></font></blockquote>
</div>
<BR>

--_----------=_1175292234279152--