Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:36 AM - Re: RV-List Digest: 45 Msgs - 05/31/05 (John Lawson)
2. 05:16 AM - Re: HS Rib Fluting (Jamie Painter)
3. 07:07 AM - Barry Palmer (brucebell74)
4. 07:28 AM - RV-8 project FOR SALE (Textor, Jack)
5. 08:20 AM - Re: What's a "VOR" ??? (SCOTT SPENCER)
6. 08:25 AM - Firewall insulation (Glen Matejcek)
7. 09:46 AM - Re: VOR Antenna limitations (Matt Jurotich)
8. 01:25 PM - Re: Re: What's a "VOR" ??? (DonVS)
9. 02:09 PM - Re: Rudder Riveting Question (Trevor Davis)
10. 04:08 PM - Re: What's a "VOR" ???(Homebuilts must have Ground based NAV equip) ()
11. 04:18 PM - Re: VOR Antenna limitations (Dave Bristol)
12. 04:36 PM - Re: Re: What's a "VOR" ???(Homebuilts must have Ground based NAV equip) (DonVS)
13. 06:02 PM - Re: Re: What's a "VOR" ???(Homebuilts must have Ground based NAV equip) NOT (Greg Young)
14. 07:16 PM - Re: Re: What's a "VOR" ??? (Ed Holyoke)
15. 07:39 PM - Re: Re: What's a "VOR" ??? (DonVS)
16. 08:40 PM - Re: Re: What's a "VOR" ??? (Ed Holyoke)
17. 09:01 PM - Re: Re: What's a "VOR" ??? (David Leonard)
18. 09:02 PM - Fw: Re: What's a "VOR" ???(Homebuilts must have Ground based NAV equip) ()
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-List Digest: 45 Msgs - 05/31/05 |
--> RV-List message posted by: John Lawson <rv6builder48138@yahoo.com>
My thanks to everyone who took the time to answer,
including Andrew. That's exactly what I needed to
know!
John
do not archive
>Time: 06:47:59 AM PST US
>From: "Andrew Barker" <Andrew@trutrakap.com>
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Question re: Tru Trak
--> RV-List message posted by: "Andrew Barker"
><Andrew@trutrakap.com>
>John,
> Do not install anything at this time. The
>installation is done in the fuselage of the RV-6.
When >you get to the fuselage, I would recommend that
you at >least run the wiring to the servo. If you
would like >to talk about your options, please give me
a call. I >am pretty much always here.
>Andrew Barker
>General Manager
>TruTrak Flight Systems
>PH: 479-751-0250 Ext.222
>Toll Free: 1-866-TruTrak
>www.trutrakap.com
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: HS Rib Fluting |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jamie Painter" <jdpainter@jpainter.org>
> I've seen pictures, on other peoples sites, of a fluting diagram for the HS
> ribs, but I don't have a diagram. I assume it is because many of the ribs
> are now pre-drilled (and I will know where to flute), when previously they
> were not. That correct?
Yes, this is correct. I went looking for those in my kit, too. Just flute
between the holes...but not on the end flanges that connect to the spars. My
experience thus far has been that you really only need to flute parts that
have a curve bent into them. The more curve the more you need to flute.
Pieces that are bent along straight lines do not (generally) need to be
fluted.
On my kit there were two ribs on the HS (just forward of the forward spar)
that were not pre-punched. The trick there is to just sit them in
place...mark the holes with a pen, remove it...flute between the pen marks,
re-insert and check that it's straight.
Hope that helps.
- Jamie
--
Jamie D. Painter
RV-7A fuselage N622JP (reserved)
http://rv.jpainter.org
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "brucebell74" <brucebell74@sbcglobal.net>
Would like to talk with Barry Palmer about his master cylinder mod.
Bruce Bell
Lubbock, Texas
RV4 # 2888
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RV-8 project FOR SALE |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Textor, Jack" <jtextor@thepalmergroup.com>
Good morning all,
For those that expressed interest in purchasing my RV-8 project, I have
updated some pictures and information on our web site at
www.textorfamily.com <http://www.textorfamily.com/> . Time and $$
dictate the sale. Excellent workmanship throughout. Project includes
RV-8 wing and empennage kits. Empennage, ailerons and flaps are
complete except fiberglass. Both tanks are complete. The right wing is
a quick build stage, ready to close. The left wing is jigged and ready
to rivet. This project is essentially at the "quick build stage and can
be purchased at below current kit prices. For more complete details
please check our web site.
Thanks!
Jack Textor
Des Moines, IA
515-225-7000 work
515-277-4173
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What's a "VOR" ??? |
--> RV-List message posted by: SCOTT SPENCER <aerokinetic@sbcglobal.net>
True. However, one thing to keep in mind is that GPS approaches are NOT authorized
for use when picking an alternate airport -which is a very important point
when flying IFR (gotta' have a back door! -both in practicality and legality
as well, depending on the conditions...) SOooo... you either have to pick an alternate
in 'guaranteed' VFR weather that allows you to proceed from the enroute
IFR structure to the surface VMC (certainly a gamble) ... OR... you must have
another form of nav onboard and pick an alternate not predicated on a GPS
approach.
Bottom line... if you go flying IFR with just a GPS onboard you're foolish (read
'stupid')... and depending on whether or not you have RAIM, the weather being
below mins and your requiring an alternate, you could be screwed. All this not
even considering a failure of your onboard equipment. Like a few others on
this list, I fly IFR for a living, and as wonderful as they are, there's no way
I'd consider going off into the muck with just a GPS.
Scott N4ZW
--> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net> Wrong!! Although there is a vor/ils built in to the 480 the gps portion is certified without the requirement to hook up or use them. It is certified (and it is the only unit that is under TSO C 146a levels 1,2,3) This is why it is stand alone. The need for ground based equipment does not apply to devices certified under C146a. Read it before you come back with flames (g) Don -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ed Holyoke Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ??? --> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net> That's because the 480 has a VOR/ILS built in. Pax, Ed Holyoke -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DonVS Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ??? --> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net> This is al
most
correvt. A Garmin 480 is certified for primary nav and needs no "land based backup".
-----Original Message----- From
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Firewall insulation |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
Hi Larry-
Thanks for the response. There doesn't seem to be much in the archives on
this subject.
Glen Matejcek
aerobubba@earthlink.net
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VOR Antenna limitations |
--> RV-List message posted by: Matt Jurotich <mjurotich@hst.nasa.gov>
Since you have 2 antennas separately coupled to 2 navs, I wonder if one may
interfering with the other in some subtle way. Given all the reports of no
shadowing with the Bob Archer antenna perhaps putting a diplexer and
running both navs from one antenna may work.
Matthew M. Jurotich
e-mail mail to: <mjurotich@hst.nasa.gov>
phone : 301-286-5919
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What's a "VOR" ??? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net>
Scott,
I have three gps's, two vor/ils's and a handheld gps for my panel. I will
also have a trutrack ap that id "a self contained" unit. You never heard
me say a word about if gps only is safe the comments were about legal, in
response to some one saying it was not legal.
Don N12VS reserved
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of SCOTT SPENCER
Subject: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: SCOTT SPENCER <aerokinetic@sbcglobal.net>
True. However, one thing to keep in mind is that GPS approaches are NOT
authorized for use when picking an alternate airport -which is a very
important point when flying IFR (gotta' have a back door! -both in
practicality and legality as well, depending on the conditions...) SOooo...
you either have to pick an alternate in 'guaranteed' VFR weather that allows
you to proceed from the enroute IFR structure to the surface VMC (certainly
a gamble) ... OR... you must have another form of nav onboard and pick an
alternate not predicated on a GPS approach.
Bottom line... if you go flying IFR with just a GPS onboard you're foolish
(read 'stupid')... and depending on whether or not you have RAIM, the
weather being below mins and your requiring an alternate, you could be
screwed. All this not even considering a failure of your onboard equipment.
Like a few others on this list, I fly IFR for a living, and as wonderful as
they are, there's no way I'd consider going off into the muck with just a
GPS.
Scott N4ZW
--> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net> Wrong!! Although
there is a vor/ils built in to the 480 the gps portion is certified without
the requirement to hook up or use them. It is certified (and it is the only
unit that is under TSO C 146a levels 1,2,3) This is why it is stand alone.
The need for ground based equipment does not apply to devices certified
under C146a. Read it before you come back with flames (g) Don -----Original
Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ed Holyoke Subject:
RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ??? --> RV-List message posted by: "Ed
Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net> That's because the 480 has a VOR/ILS built
in. Pax, Ed Holyoke -----Original Message----- From:
owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DonVS Subject: RE:
RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ??? --> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS"
<dsvs@comcast.net> This is al
most
correvt. A Garmin 480 is certified for primary nav and needs no "land based
backup". -----Original Message----- From
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Riveting Question |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Trevor Davis" <tdavis@netactive.co.za>
Michael,
Try inserting 3 or so washers under the die on the non-movable side of your
rivet squeezer.
This allows sufficient clearance when setting the rivet.
Works like a charm - did mine this morning
Trevor Davis
RV-7
Cape Town
South Africa
>
>
> >--> RV-List message posted by: MLWynn@aol.com
> >
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I should be ready to rivet my rudder this weekend, assuming I can get the
> >priming done sometime this week. At the base of the rudder, where the
rudder
> >brace R-710 sits on the rib R-704, there is either limited or no access
to
> >the
> >shop side of the rivets when riveting the skin on. Is there a trick to
> >getting
> >this spot riveted? I would normally squeeze everything on the outer
> >ribs/skin
> >interface. I assembled this area and am sort of lost on how to approach
it.
> > Blind rivets would work, but I would like to avoid them for the sake of
> >uniformity.
> >
> >Thoughts?
> >
> >Michael Wynn
> >RV-8, Empennage
> >San Ramon, California
> >
> >
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What's a "VOR" ???(Homebuilts must have Ground based NAV |
equip)
--> RV-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
>From: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net>
>Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
>This is almost correct. A Garmin 480 is certified >for primary NAV and Needs
no "land based backup".
--------------------------------------------------
Don:
We disagree and I think you are only part right, and I think you are in for a surprise,
as was I. Could be wrong but this is what the EAA has to say.
From the EAA the primary navigational facility must be ground based for an experimental:
http://members.eaa.org/home/homebuilders/faq/Equipping%20a%20Homebuilt%20for%20IFR%20operations.html
(READ: The 6th paragraph under What About GPS?)
Whether the GPS is IFR (TSOed) or not has nothing to do with it. If you read the
operating limitations for an experimental it MUST meet Part 91.205 to fly IFR,
including 91.205(d)(2), which states what KIND of NAV equipment we must have.
There is no mention of GPS or away around this, unless you have your limitation
modified or waived for your installation.
91.205(d)(2)- navigational equipment appropriate to the ground (GROUND) facilities
to be used. The point is experimental aircraft are not certified but specifically
have an operating limitation to meet 91.205 (d)(2) limitation. There is
no way around this, unless you get a waiver issued to amend or delete part of
the 91.205 requirement.
You can still use the GPS for IFR NAV, but the GPS is an adjunct not a sole replacement
in an experimental. It is not a GPS thing it is an experimental issue.
The EAA article could be wrong? What you say?
I agree with Scott, a VOR/LOC is cheap and a few paper charts gets you into basic
IFR capability. Add glide slope and ILS gets you low mins for not a lot of
money. The charts can be bought as needed without expensive electronic GPS updates.
Of course a good VFR GPS can act as a BACK-UP and improve situational awareness.
A trick is GPS direct, IFR, without an IFR approved GPS, legally. If you can get
ATC to give you a direct heading, you are legally on vectors, but you can stay
on or check you are on a good direct course by using the GPS. If they say "Heading
2-3-0 direct XYZ" you are on a direct vector. XYZ can be far away and
not a VOR, you are on a heading, but the GPS will give you a, how's-go-it. At
work I have departed Seattle late at night and got Direct Detroit, 10 minutes
after take-off, but than I have a equip code /E FMS (flight managment system).
Cheers George
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VOR Antenna limitations |
--> RV-List message posted by: Dave Bristol <dbris200@sbcglobal.net>
Again, from Bob's installation instructions:
"If two VOR receivers are being installed, one antenna should be
installed in each wing tip and each antenna connected to a receiver.
This type of installation would produce twice as much signal into each
receiver and this much signal increase would mean an increase of about
25% in VOR range."
Dave
Matt Jurotich wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Matt Jurotich <mjurotich@hst.nasa.gov>
>
>Since you have 2 antennas separately coupled to 2 navs, I wonder if one may
>interfering with the other in some subtle way. Given all the reports of no
>shadowing with the Bob Archer antenna perhaps putting a diplexer and
>running both navs from one antenna may work.
>
>Matthew M. Jurotich
>
>e-mail mail to: <mjurotich@hst.nasa.gov>
>phone : 301-286-5919
>
>
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What's a "VOR" ???(Homebuilts must have Ground based |
NAV equip)
--> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net>
George,
You are right, my mistake. Don
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com
Subject: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???(Homebuilts must have Ground
based NAV equip)
--> RV-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
>From: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net>
>Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
>This is almost correct. A Garmin 480 is certified >for primary NAV and
Needs no "land based backup".
--------------------------------------------------
Don:
We disagree and I think you are only part right, and I think you are in for
a surprise, as was I. Could be wrong but this is what the EAA has to say.
From the EAA the primary navigational facility must be ground based for an
experimental:
http://members.eaa.org/home/homebuilders/faq/Equipping%20a%20Homebuilt%20for
%20IFR%20operations.html
(READ: The 6th paragraph under What About GPS?)
Whether the GPS is IFR (TSOed) or not has nothing to do with it. If you read
the operating limitations for an experimental it MUST meet Part 91.205 to
fly IFR, including 91.205(d)(2), which states what KIND of NAV equipment we
must have. There is no mention of GPS or away around this, unless you have
your limitation modified or waived for your installation.
91.205(d)(2)- navigational equipment appropriate to the ground (GROUND)
facilities to be used. The point is experimental aircraft are not certified
but specifically have an operating limitation to meet 91.205 (d)(2)
limitation. There is no way around this, unless you get a waiver issued to
amend or delete part of the 91.205 requirement.
You can still use the GPS for IFR NAV, but the GPS is an adjunct not a sole
replacement in an experimental. It is not a GPS thing it is an experimental
issue. The EAA article could be wrong? What you say?
I agree with Scott, a VOR/LOC is cheap and a few paper charts gets you into
basic IFR capability. Add glide slope and ILS gets you low mins for not a
lot of money. The charts can be bought as needed without expensive
electronic GPS updates. Of course a good VFR GPS can act as a BACK-UP and
improve situational awareness.
A trick is GPS direct, IFR, without an IFR approved GPS, legally. If you can
get ATC to give you a direct heading, you are legally on vectors, but you
can stay on or check you are on a good direct course by using the GPS. If
they say "Heading 2-3-0 direct XYZ" you are on a direct vector. XYZ can be
far away and not a VOR, you are on a heading, but the GPS will give you a,
how's-go-it. At work I have departed Seattle late at night and got Direct
Detroit, 10 minutes after take-off, but than I have a equip code /E FMS
(flight managment system).
Cheers George
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What's a "VOR" ???(Homebuilts must have Ground based |
NAV equip) NOT
--> RV-List message posted by: "Greg Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
Since y'all want to get so literal, then read it carefully. It says:
> 91.205(d)(2)- navigational equipment appropriate to the
> ground (GROUND) facilities <<TO BE USED>>. (emphasis mine)
If you aren't using any <ground> facilities, then NOT having any
<ground> nav equipment is perfectly appropriate. I don't have a dog in
this fight since I've got an approach certified GPS and Nav/Com... Just
stirring the pot.
Greg
>
> Whether the GPS is IFR (TSOed) or not has nothing to do with
> it. If you read the operating limitations for an experimental
> it MUST meet Part 91.205 to fly IFR, including 91.205(d)(2),
> which states what KIND of NAV equipment we must have. There
> is no mention of GPS or away around this, unless you have
> your limitation modified or waived for your installation.
>
>
> 91.205(d)(2)- navigational equipment appropriate to the
> ground (GROUND) facilities to be used. The point is
> experimental aircraft are not certified but specifically have
> an operating limitation to meet 91.205 (d)(2) limitation.
> There is no way around this, unless you get a waiver issued
> to amend or delete part of the 91.205 requirement.
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What's a "VOR" ??? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
Flames?? I haven't studied C 146a so I'll have to take your word for it.
I was going by what I was told by an avionics shop tech. We were
discussing the need for VOR with IFR GPS and annunciator. He said that
the 440 and 540s didn't need a separate annunciator as long as they were
within 30 degrees of the pilot's field of view, but that no approach
certified GPS installation would be approved without a VOR receiver of
some sort also installed. Note that he was talking about the
installation being legal, not the receiver. This discussion was held
before the GNS 480 was certified and if my info is out of date, I'm
sorry that I flamed you with it. (g)
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DonVS
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net>
Wrong!! Although there is a vor/ils built in to the 480 the gps portion
is
certified without the requirement to hook up or use them. It is
certified
(and it is the only unit that is under TSO C 146a levels 1,2,3) This is
why
it is stand alone. The need for ground based equipment does not apply
to
devices certified under C146a. Read it before you come back with flames
(g)
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ed Holyoke
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
That's because the 480 has a VOR/ILS built in.
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DonVS
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net>
This is almost correvt. A Garmin 480 is certified for primary nav and
needs
no "land based backup".
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com
Subject: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
Chuck:
You may be declairing the death of VORs a little early. True in 10, 20,
50
years VORs may be phased out. Who knows? As we all know the GPS is
superior
in many ways to a VOR. However..
Your RV is not legal for IFR with an IFR GPS alone (Ref. Blue Mountain
Avionics and FARs).
I assume you are talking about IFR flight. I would agree for VFR a VOR
is
not needed with a GPS; However, before you pat yourself on the back for
declaring the death of VORs, you should consider an RV is not legal for
IFR
with an IFR GPS alone. Read the Regs., experimental aircraft are not
exempt
from having NAV equipment suitable for ground (GROUND) stations to be
used.
Yes certified aircraft may get away with certifying IFR without a VOR
(but
dont know of any); Check the operation limitations for an experimental,
FAR
91.205(d)(2)- navigational equipment appropriate to the ground (GROUND)
facilities to be used. You require one ground based NAV unit and there
is no
exemption at this time. The airway system is still the basis in the USA
and
is based on VORs.
>
>
>
>From: Chuck <chuck515tigger@yahoo.com> Subject: What's a "VOR" ???
> RV-List message posted by: Chuck <chuck515tigger@yahoo.com>
>
>Hey I ain't seen any good flamin' for awhile, so I'll see what I can
stir
up....
>
>VOR's are extinct! Yep they went the way of covered wagons,
revolvers,
and startin' >fires with flint. EVERYONE is using GPS, pilotage and
dead-reckoning. Heck a'doodle >lining up 'dem cross hairs is for
Sissies,
student pilots, and folks who can't afford 100 >bucks for a hand-held
GPS
that'll get you darn near anywheres, anytime, anyhow ('cept >watch out
for
those F-18's when ya' blow through one of 'dem darn alphabet-soup
>areas).
>
>There, that ought to do it. Nomex britches on...
>
>Chuck
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What's a "VOR" ??? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net>
Ed,
Sorry. I guess you missed the (g). Just my sick sence of humor. I have a
shattered elbow so I may be a little tense right now. No malice intended.
Don
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ed Holyoke
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
Flames?? I haven't studied C 146a so I'll have to take your word for it.
I was going by what I was told by an avionics shop tech. We were
discussing the need for VOR with IFR GPS and annunciator. He said that
the 440 and 540s didn't need a separate annunciator as long as they were
within 30 degrees of the pilot's field of view, but that no approach
certified GPS installation would be approved without a VOR receiver of
some sort also installed. Note that he was talking about the
installation being legal, not the receiver. This discussion was held
before the GNS 480 was certified and if my info is out of date, I'm
sorry that I flamed you with it. (g)
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DonVS
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net>
Wrong!! Although there is a vor/ils built in to the 480 the gps portion
is
certified without the requirement to hook up or use them. It is
certified
(and it is the only unit that is under TSO C 146a levels 1,2,3) This is
why
it is stand alone. The need for ground based equipment does not apply
to
devices certified under C146a. Read it before you come back with flames
(g)
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ed Holyoke
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
That's because the 480 has a VOR/ILS built in.
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DonVS
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net>
This is almost correvt. A Garmin 480 is certified for primary nav and
needs
no "land based backup".
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com
Subject: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
Chuck:
You may be declairing the death of VORs a little early. True in 10, 20,
50
years VORs may be phased out. Who knows? As we all know the GPS is
superior
in many ways to a VOR. However..
Your RV is not legal for IFR with an IFR GPS alone (Ref. Blue Mountain
Avionics and FARs).
I assume you are talking about IFR flight. I would agree for VFR a VOR
is
not needed with a GPS; However, before you pat yourself on the back for
declaring the death of VORs, you should consider an RV is not legal for
IFR
with an IFR GPS alone. Read the Regs., experimental aircraft are not
exempt
from having NAV equipment suitable for ground (GROUND) stations to be
used.
Yes certified aircraft may get away with certifying IFR without a VOR
(but
dont know of any); Check the operation limitations for an experimental,
FAR
91.205(d)(2)- navigational equipment appropriate to the ground (GROUND)
facilities to be used. You require one ground based NAV unit and there
is no
exemption at this time. The airway system is still the basis in the USA
and
is based on VORs.
>
>
>
>From: Chuck <chuck515tigger@yahoo.com> Subject: What's a "VOR" ???
> RV-List message posted by: Chuck <chuck515tigger@yahoo.com>
>
>Hey I ain't seen any good flamin' for awhile, so I'll see what I can
stir
up....
>
>VOR's are extinct! Yep they went the way of covered wagons,
revolvers,
and startin' >fires with flint. EVERYONE is using GPS, pilotage and
dead-reckoning. Heck a'doodle >lining up 'dem cross hairs is for
Sissies,
student pilots, and folks who can't afford 100 >bucks for a hand-held
GPS
that'll get you darn near anywheres, anytime, anyhow ('cept >watch out
for
those F-18's when ya' blow through one of 'dem darn alphabet-soup
>areas).
>
>There, that ought to do it. Nomex britches on...
>
>Chuck
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What's a "VOR" ??? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
It's OK Don. No offence taken. I put a little (g) there too. Sorry to
hear about the elbow. Hope it heals OK.
Pax,
Ed
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DonVS
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net>
Ed,
Sorry. I guess you missed the (g). Just my sick sence of humor. I
have a
shattered elbow so I may be a little tense right now. No malice
intended.
Don
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ed Holyoke
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
Flames?? I haven't studied C 146a so I'll have to take your word for it.
I was going by what I was told by an avionics shop tech. We were
discussing the need for VOR with IFR GPS and annunciator. He said that
the 440 and 540s didn't need a separate annunciator as long as they were
within 30 degrees of the pilot's field of view, but that no approach
certified GPS installation would be approved without a VOR receiver of
some sort also installed. Note that he was talking about the
installation being legal, not the receiver. This discussion was held
before the GNS 480 was certified and if my info is out of date, I'm
sorry that I flamed you with it. (g)
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DonVS
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net>
Wrong!! Although there is a vor/ils built in to the 480 the gps portion
is
certified without the requirement to hook up or use them. It is
certified
(and it is the only unit that is under TSO C 146a levels 1,2,3) This is
why
it is stand alone. The need for ground based equipment does not apply
to
devices certified under C146a. Read it before you come back with flames
(g)
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ed Holyoke
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
That's because the 480 has a VOR/ILS built in.
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DonVS
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: "DonVS" <dsvs@comcast.net>
This is almost correvt. A Garmin 480 is certified for primary nav and
needs
no "land based backup".
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com
Subject: RV-List: Re: What's a "VOR" ???
--> RV-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
Chuck:
You may be declairing the death of VORs a little early. True in 10, 20,
50
years VORs may be phased out. Who knows? As we all know the GPS is
superior
in many ways to a VOR. However..
Your RV is not legal for IFR with an IFR GPS alone (Ref. Blue Mountain
Avionics and FARs).
I assume you are talking about IFR flight. I would agree for VFR a VOR
is
not needed with a GPS; However, before you pat yourself on the back for
declaring the death of VORs, you should consider an RV is not legal for
IFR
with an IFR GPS alone. Read the Regs., experimental aircraft are not
exempt
from having NAV equipment suitable for ground (GROUND) stations to be
used.
Yes certified aircraft may get away with certifying IFR without a VOR
(but
dont know of any); Check the operation limitations for an experimental,
FAR
91.205(d)(2)- navigational equipment appropriate to the ground (GROUND)
facilities to be used. You require one ground based NAV unit and there
is no
exemption at this time. The airway system is still the basis in the USA
and
is based on VORs.
>
>
>
>From: Chuck <chuck515tigger@yahoo.com> Subject: What's a "VOR" ???
> RV-List message posted by: Chuck <chuck515tigger@yahoo.com>
>
>Hey I ain't seen any good flamin' for awhile, so I'll see what I can
stir
up....
>
>VOR's are extinct! Yep they went the way of covered wagons,
revolvers,
and startin' >fires with flint. EVERYONE is using GPS, pilotage and
dead-reckoning. Heck a'doodle >lining up 'dem cross hairs is for
Sissies,
student pilots, and folks who can't afford 100 >bucks for a hand-held
GPS
that'll get you darn near anywheres, anytime, anyhow ('cept >watch out
for
those F-18's when ya' blow through one of 'dem darn alphabet-soup
>areas).
>
>There, that ought to do it. Nomex britches on...
>
>Chuck
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What's a "VOR" ??? |
--> RV-List message posted by: David Leonard <wdleonard@gmail.com>
On 6/1/05, SCOTT SPENCER <aerokinetic@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: SCOTT SPENCER <aerokinetic@sbcglobal.net>
>
> True. However, one thing to keep in mind is that GPS approaches are NOT
> authorized for use when picking an alternate airport -which is a very
> important point when flying IFR (gotta' have a back door! -both in
> practicality and legality as well, depending on the conditions...) SOooo...
> you either have to pick an alternate in 'guaranteed' VFR weather that allows
> you to proceed from the enroute IFR structure to the surface VMC (certainly
> a gamble) ... OR... you must have another form of nav onboard and pick an
> alternate not predicated on a GPS approach.
Scott, just to clarify for everyone, it is legal to intend to use, and use
a GPS approach at your filed alternated airport. What you can't do is file
an airport that has ONLY GPS approaches.
Bottom line... if you go flying IFR with just a GPS onboard you're foolish
> (read 'stupid')... and depending on whether or not you have RAIM, the
> weather being below mins and your requiring an alternate, you could be
> screwed. All this not even considering a failure of your onboard equipment.
> Like a few others on this list, I fly IFR for a living, and as wonderful as
> they are, there's no way I'd consider going off into the muck with just a
> GPS.
Can't dissagree with that. Note that all IFR GPS, even in an experimental,
must have RAIM. It is part of the performance requirements for both en route
and approach IFR GPS, TSO'd or not.
--
Dave Leonard
Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/rotaryroster/index.html
http://members.aol.com/vp4skydoc/index.html
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: Re: What's a "VOR" ???(Homebuilts must have Ground based |
NAV equip)
--> RV-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
Apparently the EAA site is down? Here is another link to get you to the info.
http://images.rvproject.com/IFR_Equipment.pdf
Here is the Par in question:
"As we are required by out Operating :imitations to equip the aircraft in accordance
with the 91.205, this statement tells us that out primary navigational equipment
must be based on the ground facilities (primary VOR). As this is the
case m a homebuilt with only a GPS installed would not be legal for IFR operations."
Questions?
BTW, TSO, Technical Standard Order, means squat to us and refers to performance
of equipment and has nothing to do with operating limitations.
Prove that experimental Op limits don't apply. TSO is not going to do it. Sorry,
no offense, but if you disagree could you base your argument on facts based
on FAR's. Remember experimental aircraft are NOT certified, which usually works
in our favor in maintenance and modifications.
Cheers George
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|