Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 09:24 AM - Re: Home-made 406 MHz alternatives? ()
2. 09:56 AM - Re: Re: Home-made 406 MHz alternatives? (Ron Lee)
3. 07:42 PM - IFR GPS requirements (William Gill)
4. 08:55 PM - Re: IFR GPS requirements (Kelly McMullen)
5. 09:16 PM - Re: IFR GPS requirements (Sam Buchanan)
6. 09:49 PM - Re: IFR GPS requirements (Bruce Gray)
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: Home-made 406 MHz alternatives? |
>"Technically, there's nothing stopping any of us from
doing this"
Yes there is. Nice try but ELT's are one device that
MUST meet strict specifications regardless of type of
aircraft its mounted to. Not saying you can't make a
homemade ELT, but it would be illegal and break FAA,
FCC and international SAR regulations. The ELT and
transponder are two devices that must be "certified"
even if in an experimental aircraft.
Fork over $1000 for a Artex 406ME, be done,
and also get a $600 PLB.
>From: "Rob Prior" <rv7@b4.ca>
>Subject: RV-List: Home-made 406 MHz alternatives?
Why couldn't we start with a (cheap) 406Mhz PLB, rig
up our own GPS interface, and our own inertial or
manual trigger?
Technically, there's nothing stopping any of us from
doing this, it's really not rocket science. The question
is, why isn't it acceptable, if the plane is experimental in
the first place?
Discuss... :) -Rob
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
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: Home-made 406 MHz alternatives? |
My suggestion for the below comment is get the GPS enabled 406 MHz ELT
and the Spot unit for everyday notification of your position.
The most important thing is don't make stupid decisions about piloting.
Ron Lee
Fork over $1000 for a Artex 406ME, be done,
and also get a $600 PLB.
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 |
|
| Subject: | IFR GPS requirements |
Hello All,
I have a Bendix-King KLN 94 GPS (IFR certified unit) in an RV-7. During
discussions with an FAA inspector, I was told that I was not allowed to
use this unit for IFR use until I completed a 337 form with a field
approval, and completed the required test flight. I was not aware that
the experimental ships had to jump through the same hoops as the Type
Certificated aircraft. Can this possibly be true? I welcome all input on
this subject.
Bill
RV-7
Lee's Summit, MO
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: | Re: IFR GPS requirements |
Get a copy of AC-20-138A dated 12/22/03. It is the latest guidance on
panel mount GPS. However, it is written for TC aircraft. How that
translates to amateur built is not clear to me. Key tests the FAA is
interested in include frequency interference with installed navcoms, and
a flight test in VFR demonstrating its accuracy by visual observation on
some approaches and over known points in the database.
William Gill wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> I have a Bendix-King KLN 94 GPS (IFR certified unit) in an RV-7.
> During discussions with an FAA inspector, I was told that I was not
> allowed to use this unit for IFR use until I completed a 337 form with
> a field approval, and completed the required test flight. I was not
> aware that the experimental ships had to jump through the same hoops
> as the Type Certificated aircraft. Can this possibly be true? I
> welcome all input on this subject.
>
> Bill
>
> RV-7
>
> Lees Summit, MO
>
> *
>
>
> *
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: IFR GPS requirements |
William Gill wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I have a Bendix-King KLN 94 GPS (IFR certified unit) in an RV-7. During
> discussions with an FAA inspector, I was told that I was not allowed to
> use this unit for IFR use until I completed a 337 form with a field
> approval, and completed the required test flight. I was not aware that
> the experimental ships had to jump through the same hoops as the Type
> Certificated aircraft. Can this possibly be true? I welcome all input on
> this subject.
337's are not applicable to aircraft with an experimental airworthiness
certificate. The 337 form is authorized under FAR 43.
However, FAR 43.1 (3b) states:
"This part (FAR 43) does not apply to any aircraft for which an
experimental airworthiness certificate has been issued, unless a
different kind of airworthiness certificate had previously been issued
for that aircraft."
The FAA official is sadly misinformed.
Sam Buchanan
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: | IFR GPS requirements |
To install a KLN 94 in an experimental aircraft and NOT perform the tests
required in AC-20-138A would be, in my opinion, reckless and foolish. I'm
not saying you need a 337, just do the tests and verify that the thing works
as advertised before you fly IMC.
Bruce
www.Glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: IFR GPS requirements
Get a copy of AC-20-138A dated 12/22/03. It is the latest guidance on
panel mount GPS. However, it is written for TC aircraft. How that
translates to amateur built is not clear to me. Key tests the FAA is
interested in include frequency interference with installed navcoms, and
a flight test in VFR demonstrating its accuracy by visual observation on
some approaches and over known points in the database.
William Gill wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> I have a Bendix-King KLN 94 GPS (IFR certified unit) in an RV-7.
> During discussions with an FAA inspector, I was told that I was not
> allowed to use this unit for IFR use until I completed a 337 form with
> a field approval, and completed the required test flight. I was not
> aware that the experimental ships had to jump through the same hoops
> as the Type Certificated aircraft. Can this possibly be true? I
> welcome all input on this subject.
>
> Bill
>
> RV-7
>
> Lee's Summit, MO
>
> *
>
>
> *
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! --
|