GPS and IFR

[John Clark]

Radar vectors

Better have planned for and have weather for the visual approach though

Navigating strictly by radar vectors is a sucker move without situational awareness and clear "way out." Several times in my career flying Part 121 IFR, I heard the phrase "Radar contact lost, what is your estimate to XXX VOR?"

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

 

[RV8R999]

I don't know if I'd go as far as to say "sucker move"...RADAR, VOR's, TACANS, and GPS all fail from time to time. Just two days ago flying IFR from Jax to TLH via the CRG VORTAC the VORTAC went TU. Called ATC and they confirmed it was broke... "cleared to GRL VORTAC via RADAR VECTORS" GRL was way outside our TACAN range for our altitude so for legal purposes our only means of navigating was via vectors. Of course having a non certified GPS as a backup makes it all very easy, but it isn't certified so can't say its the primary Nav source. I do agree Navigating soley by RADAR vectors without ANY back-up (certified or otherwise) is riskier than without and I wouldn't normally plan to launch that way unless it was an emergency.

 

[terrykohler]

Relying on Radar Contact

Ken:
Gotta agree with John on this one. Even today, you can't fly below 6000 over Michigan's Upper Peninsula without hearing "radar contact lost, advise over ....". While my current instrument flying is done with a single VOR and a non-cert GPS, it's much better than what we had in "Old Days". Even then, I can't remember IFR flights without some backup - either another VOR or an ADF. Radar coverage seems to get better all the time, but I wouldn't want to bet too heavily on it. Incidentally, your comment
I wouldn't normally plan to launch that way unless it was an emergency.
pretty much sums up that your flight mentality is (necessarily) much different than mine. Glad you're on our side.
Terry, CFI
RV-9A N323TP

 

[Guyfly47]

You guys are making way too much of it. Let's simplify here: The Garmin 430W is approved as a "sole source of navigation".

Not trying too much of things here, but what about the display?

It is my understanding that the GNS430W's approval is a result of its TSO if installed with the Garmin GI-106 CDI. If one uses a non-TSO'd EFIS to display course guidance instead of the GI-106 CDI, then how does a builder show it is acceptable if not "approved" as installed?

And who would he have to show it to anyway?