Does an "IFR approved" GPS placard require database updates?

[Peter]

I've been told that if one's GPS is an IFR approved unit (KLN94B in my
case) and it's not placarded "VFR only" then I am required to have the
latest database, otherwise I am not complying with the minimum
equipment list (in ANY flight) - is this correct?

If so, what would this mean for the validity of insurance?

Peter.
--
Return address is invalid to help stop junk mail.
E-mail replies to ***@peter2000XY.co.uk but remove the X and the Y.
Please do NOT copy usenet posts to email - it is NOT necessary.

[Bob Noel]

Post by Peter
I've been told that if one's GPS is an IFR approved unit (KLN94B in my
case) and it's not placarded "VFR only" then I am required to have the
latest database, otherwise I am not complying with the minimum
equipment list (in ANY flight) - is this correct?

I would think that if a database update was required and the unit displayed
an appropriate message wrt the database validity, then that would satisfy
any placard requirement.

Does your aircraft have an MEL?

Post by Peter
If so, what would this mean for the validity of insurance?

You'd have to find out from your insurance company.

[Charlie Derk]

During my instrument training I was told that if you have an IFR
certified GPS, it had to be updated if you were using it for IFR Flight.
You can use it VFR even if it hasn't been updated
Charlie

Post by Peter
I've been told that if one's GPS is an IFR approved unit (KLN94B in my
case) and it's not placarded "VFR only" then I am required to have the
latest database, otherwise I am not complying with the minimum
equipment list (in ANY flight) - is this correct?
If so, what would this mean for the validity of insurance?
Peter.
--
Return address is invalid to help stop junk mail.
Please do NOT copy usenet posts to email - it is NOT necessary.

[p***@juneauDOTmeDOTvt.edu]

In rec.aviation.misc Charlie Derk <***@nospam.com> wrote:
: During my instrument training I was told that if you have an IFR
: certified GPS, it had to be updated if you were using it for IFR Flight.
: You can use it VFR even if it hasn't been updated
: Charlie

As I've heard it, you can technically fly IFR with an expired database, so
long as you have verified that the data for every piece of information in the database
that you will use is correct.

-Cory

[Newps]

Post by p***@juneauDOTmeDOTvt.edu
: During my instrument training I was told that if you have an IFR
: certified GPS, it had to be updated if you were using it for IFR Flight.

The answer is it depends on the model of GPS. The POH Supplement will
tell you.

Post by p***@juneauDOTmeDOTvt.edu
: You can use it VFR even if it hasn't been updated

Right.

[jmk]

Exactly... Using it for an IFR GPS is all about the POH supplement.
Garmin requires updates. UPSAT did not - just required that you verify
that the approach hasn't changed.

None of this prevents you from using the GPS, of course, for enroute
VFR use.

Now some years ago there was a controversy started by Flying magazine
because of the speculation that an over zealous FAA inspector might
view an out of date database as a violation. But the FAA clarified
that this was not the case. Same deal as with outdated charts in the
plane. Perfectly okay... But you MUST have the current information
you need to complete the flight safely. That same outdated chart (or
database) won't get you out of jail if you violate some airspace (or
worse, violate the terrain).

[Peter]

Post by Newps
The answer is it depends on the model of GPS. The POH Supplement will
tell you.

Thank you all for your feedback. It turns out that the KLN94B
supplement in my FAA POH is (I am not 100% sure yet, but it has to be)
the completely wrong supplement....

[Chuck]

On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:24:32 +0000 (UTC),

Post by p***@juneauDOTmeDOTvt.edu
: During my instrument training I was told that if you have an IFR
: certified GPS, it had to be updated if you were using it for IFR Flight.
: You can use it VFR even if it hasn't been updated
: Charlie
As I've heard it, you can technically fly IFR with an expired database, so
long as you have verified that the data for every piece of information in the database
that you will use is correct.
-Cory

I've heard that recently myself. You can use an expired database GPS
for all the VFR you want. But to use it for IFR, you first have to
confirm the database information for any approach you'll use hasn't
changed. Or you have to manually chage it in the database if it has
changed.

I don't have a reference on that, but the subject came up in a group
of instructors and a couple of FAA inspectors. In any case, I know
the FAA is allowing a local FBO to rent out and train in a plane with
a LONG expired database. This Garmin 430 was definitely installed
complaint with TSO C129, but the owner was too cheap to keep up the
database updates.


Chuck

[Peter Clark]

Post by Chuck
On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:24:32 +0000 (UTC),

Post by p***@juneauDOTmeDOTvt.edu
: During my instrument training I was told that if you have an IFR
: certified GPS, it had to be updated if you were using it for IFR Flight.
: You can use it VFR even if it hasn't been updated
: Charlie
As I've heard it, you can technically fly IFR with an expired database, so
long as you have verified that the data for every piece of information in the database
that you will use is correct.
-Cory

I've heard that recently myself. You can use an expired database GPS
for all the VFR you want. But to use it for IFR, you first have to
confirm the database information for any approach you'll use hasn't
changed. Or you have to manually chage it in the database if it has
changed.

Unless precluded by the flight manual supplement or, if incorporated
by reference like "Must be operated in accordance with the owners
manual" in the supplement, the users guide.

The KLN89B and KLN94 are apparently two such units - their supplement
introduction states "NOTE: A current database is required by
regulation in order to use the (blah) GPS system for non-precision
approaches". The KLN94 limitations page states "Instrument approaches
must be accomplished in accordance with approved instrument approach
procedures that are retrieved from the KLN 94 database. The KLN 94
aeronautical database must incorporate the current update cycle." The
89B's limitations page is similar, except they also have a minimum
software revision limitation.

Doesn't look to have any discretion to verify and go with expired
databases with these boxes at least.

[Peter R.]

Post by Peter Clark
The KLN89B and KLN94 are apparently two such units - their supplement
introduction states "NOTE: A current database is required by
regulation in order to use the (blah) GPS system for non-precision
approaches".

Minus the words "by regulation," my Garmin GNS430 GPS also has such as
restriction in the POH supplement.

I recall reading here that at least one other GNS430 owner did not have
such a restriction in his supplement. One possible explanation may be that
my unit, as purchased by the previous owner of the aircraft, was one of the
first GNS430s available. Perhaps Garmin and/or the FAA loosened that
restriction as time went on.
--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Dave Butler]

Post by Chuck
You can use an expired database GPS
for all the VFR you want. But to use it for IFR, you first have to
confirm the database information for any approach you'll use hasn't
changed. Or you have to manually chage it in the database if it has
changed.
I don't have a reference on that, ... <snip>

The applicable document is the Supplemental POH. The Supplemental POH is
approved on an installation by installation basis, so there is technically no
general answer, except RTFM for your airplane.

In practice, the GPS manufacturer provides a boilerplate SPOH, so that's what
gets sent into OK City for approval.

Dave

[Roger]

Post by Chuck
On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:24:32 +0000 (UTC),

Post by p***@juneauDOTmeDOTvt.edu
: During my instrument training I was told that if you have an IFR
: certified GPS, it had to be updated if you were using it for IFR Flight.
: You can use it VFR even if it hasn't been updated
: Charlie
As I've heard it, you can technically fly IFR with an expired database, so
long as you have verified that the data for every piece of information in the database
that you will use is correct.

All you need is a set of paper charts that are up-to-date, unless
otherwise stated in either the manual or POH. This was covered in one
of the flying mags this past month.


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Post by Chuck

Post by p***@juneauDOTmeDOTvt.edu
-Cory

I've heard that recently myself. You can use an expired database GPS
for all the VFR you want. But to use it for IFR, you first have to
confirm the database information for any approach you'll use hasn't
changed. Or you have to manually chage it in the database if it has
changed.
I don't have a reference on that, but the subject came up in a group
of instructors and a couple of FAA inspectors. In any case, I know
the FAA is allowing a local FBO to rent out and train in a plane with
a LONG expired database. This Garmin 430 was definitely installed
complaint with TSO C129, but the owner was too cheap to keep up the
database updates.
Chuck

[Ron Natalie]

Post by Peter
I've been told that if one's GPS is an IFR approved unit (KLN94B in my
case) and it's not placarded "VFR only" then I am required to have the
latest database, otherwise I am not complying with the minimum
equipment list (in ANY flight) - is this correct?

You need to read the flight manual supplement for your aircraft.
Different installations have different reqirements. It's
doubtful that "MEL" applies at all here since your plane most
likely doesn't have one.

As far as non-IFR flight, nobody suggests ripping the alitmeter out
of my plane because my IFR certs have expired.

[Doug]

In regard to insurance, unless your insurance excludes it, you are
covered. So read your policy, paying close attention to the exclusions.
I can't imagine that a policy would exclude coverage for something like
that. All mine requires is the airplane be in annual at the anniversary
date of the policy and that I have a current medical. If, for example,
my annual expires or my medical expires, I am still covered so long as
I had them when the policy was initiated (the anniversary date).

You hear a lot of rumors about "insurance wont cover that". Most of
them quoted by people who never owned a plane and never read an
insurance policy.

Read your insurance. Does it say you have to comply with the minimum
equipment list to be covered? I would bet it doesn't.

Think about it. If your car had an expired inspection and you ran a
stop sign causing damage, do you think your car insurance would NOT
cover you?

[Jeroen Wenting]

Post by Doug
Think about it. If your car had an expired inspection and you ran a
stop sign causing damage, do you think your car insurance would NOT
cover you?

Small difference.
Car maintenance isn't required by law (I know in many places a minimum
maintenance level for certain safety related things is required but nothing
requires you to have maintenance performed at set intervals).
For aircraft maintenance is required by law.

[Judah]

Post by Jeroen Wenting

Post by Doug
Think about it. If your car had an expired inspection and you ran a
stop sign causing damage, do you think your car insurance would NOT
cover you?

Small difference.
Car maintenance isn't required by law (I know in many places a minimum
maintenance level for certain safety related things is required but
nothing requires you to have maintenance performed at set intervals).
For aircraft maintenance is required by law.

In New York and New Jersey an inspection is required. Most cars must pass
inspection at least once every 12 months. I think some newer cars are
allowed longer...

If during the inspection it is determined that the car requires
maintenance, for example needs new brakes or has a broken taillight, it
will fail inspection unless the problem is repaired. In New Jersey, it's a
big hassle because the inspectors work for the DMV, and don't do repairs on
site. In New York, it's a bit easier because most service centers can get
certified as state inspectors. I'm not sure what state you are in that
doesn't require some sort of vehicle inspection, but then they don't let us
carry guns in NY either. ;)

[Doug]

Like I said, READ the policy. Only the policy itself will tell you. And
in general, if it is not excluded, it is covered. I gave you an example
of what MY policy says. Others may handle it differently. But insurance
is designed to cover mistakes. Insurance doesn't always require
compliance with laws for coverage. What if you ran a stop sign and ran
into someone and did damage with a car? Certainly you would be covered
(unless it is excluded). Would you buy car insurance that excluded
coverage if you broke the law? Even negligence is covered. It is
negligent to run a stop sign.

If you violate a FAR and have an accident, is the insurance invalid?
Mine is still valid. There is no exclusion for that. It is highly
likely that if you have an accident you will have violated some FAR.

The idea that insurance is invalid because the pilot violated a FAR is
one that you hear quite frequently. I think it is usually, not always,
wrong. Usually there IS coverage in spite of such an error.

[Peter]

Post by Doug
The idea that insurance is invalid because the pilot violated a FAR is
one that you hear quite frequently. I think it is usually, not always,
wrong. Usually there IS coverage in spite of such an error.

What if the pilot violated a FAR prior to takeoff?

Let's say he departed on an IFR flight plan, with an IFR clearance (so
there is NO doubt he was intending to fly under IFR rules) but he did
not have an instrument rating?

The FARs require an N registered aircraft, flown under IFR, to have an
"instrument rated" pilot.

According to some contacts I had with the insurance business, this
would make the insurance void.

But if the PPL pilot entered IMC en-route and an incident followed, it
is almost certain (IMV) that he would remain insured.

As regards maintenance, my insurance requires the aircraft to be
airworthy. This means all applicable maintenance must be done.

As regards my original post in this thread, I have now got to the
bottom of this. Someone told me that it is illegal to fly with an
"IFR" placarded GPS unless the database is current. I am now certain
this is rubbish.

However, in the process of digging into this area, I discovered that
the FAA approved flight manual supplement I had prohibited the GPS to
be used for anything whatsoever, unless the pilot had manually
verified each waypoint's coordinates (which is silly). The aircraft
manufacturer (Socata in France) never certified the KLN94 installation
for IFR usage. Their U.S. outlet does this extra bit for their
customers, using the standard procedure which involves a flight test
and the local FSDO approves the flight manual supplement. I now have
to get this done. Another lesson learnt.

[Chris]

"> As regards my original post in this thread, I have now got to the

Post by Peter
bottom of this. Someone told me that it is illegal to fly with an
"IFR" placarded GPS unless the database is current. I am now certain
this is rubbish.
However, in the process of digging into this area, I discovered that
the FAA approved flight manual supplement I had prohibited the GPS to
be used for anything whatsoever, unless the pilot had manually
verified each waypoint's coordinates (which is silly). The aircraft
manufacturer (Socata in France) never certified the KLN94 installation
for IFR usage. Their U.S. outlet does this extra bit for their
customers, using the standard procedure which involves a flight test
and the local FSDO approves the flight manual supplement. I now have
to get this done. Another lesson learnt.

GPS for IFR is only just coming into Europe and I think that France recently
published the first GPS approach.

This is one of the problems the Cirrus has in Europe. Most approaches here
require ADF and or DME and distances off a GPS are not allowed. Cirrus'
solution is a botch job which spoils the pretty panel and they are brassing
off a few customers in the process.

So here even an up-to-date database is worth squat in the IFR environment.

[Peter]

Post by Chris
GPS for IFR is only just coming into Europe and I think that France recently
published the first GPS approach.

The issue isn't approaches; it is the ability to use the GPS for
European BRNAV routes. VOR/ADF/DME is not legally sufficient; a BRNAV
approved (loosely meaning the same as the U.S. "IFR approved") GPS is
mandatory for that. There is no way around this. Funny, isn't it,
given the lack of GPS approaches in Europe and the general anti-GPS
attitudes over here :)

So I have to make sure I am legal for BRNAV in Europe. Just like a
U.S. 747 flying to Europe has to be.

Post by Chris
This is one of the problems the Cirrus has in Europe. Most approaches here
require ADF and or DME and distances off a GPS are not allowed. Cirrus'
solution is a botch job which spoils the pretty panel and they are brassing
off a few customers in the process.

Yes, I spoke to their UK dealer in 2002 about this. The answer at the
time was that GPS is way better than an ADF, which is true but not
exactly helpful. They've had 3 years to come up with a clean
integrated solution but perhaps the Euro market is too small?

Post by Chris
So here even an up-to-date database is worth squat in the IFR environment.

I disagree; BRNAV usage does require an up to date GPS database - or
(if the supplement allows this) a manual verification of all waypoint
coordinates (which isn't practical).

The issue which got me started on this thread is that I have an N reg
aircraft. This means it has to comply with FAA requirements (as well
as with any local-airspace ones). My FM supplement for the KLN94
prohibits all practical usage. Socata France have now advised me that
the supplement I have is legal for European BRNAV (which is the only
practical interest to me; flying to the USA is > 30 hours airborne
time :) ).

The supplement is definitely not legal for IFR usage according to the
FAA rules, ** in the USA **. However, a phone call yesterday to the
local FAA office has produced a confirmation that if the supplement is
DGAC approved (which it is) the FAA are happy with it - which is what
I wanted!

[Tauno Voipio]

Post by Peter

Post by Chris
GPS for IFR is only just coming into Europe and I think that France recently
published the first GPS approach.

The issue isn't approaches; it is the ability to use the GPS for
European BRNAV routes. VOR/ADF/DME is not legally sufficient; a BRNAV
approved (loosely meaning the same as the U.S. "IFR approved") GPS is
mandatory for that. There is no way around this. Funny, isn't it,
given the lack of GPS approaches in Europe and the general anti-GPS
attitudes over here :)

This is not true: There are both VOR/DME -based and GPS-based
approved BRNAV airplanes in Europe.

The minimum requirement for BRNAV is a VOR/DME -based system
capable of storing at least 4 waypoints.

I have European approval on my Piper Turbo Arrow with a
King KNS-80 as the RNAV box.

[Peter]

Post by Tauno Voipio
The minimum requirement for BRNAV is a VOR/DME -based system
capable of storing at least 4 waypoints.
I have European approval on my Piper Turbo Arrow with a
King KNS-80 as the RNAV box.

Yes, the KNS-80 RNAV was OK for this, but not any more because it does
not meet the CAA FM Immunity requirements. (this requirement claims to
address the proximity of the FM broadcast band to the FM aviation
band; not that anybody has ever come across any problems but the UK
CAA says so...)

An FM Immune RNAV device (which creates virtual VORs like the KNS-80)
ought to be acceptable, but one wouldn't generally install one of
those today.

[Tauno Voipio]

Post by Peter

Post by Tauno Voipio
The minimum requirement for BRNAV is a VOR/DME -based system
capable of storing at least 4 waypoints.
I have European approval on my Piper Turbo Arrow with a
King KNS-80 as the RNAV box.

Yes, the KNS-80 RNAV was OK for this, but not any more because it does
not meet the CAA FM Immunity requirements. (this requirement claims to
address the proximity of the FM broadcast band to the FM aviation
band; not that anybody has ever come across any problems but the UK
CAA says so...)

That's taken care of with a suitable preselection filter from King.

The airplane (OH-PYM) is BRNAV capable and approved now.

[Peter]

Post by Tauno Voipio
That's taken care of with a suitable preselection filter from King.

OK, I accept that :)

How do you use a KNS-80 in e.g. France, where most VORs don't have a
co-located DME?

[Bob Noel]

Post by Peter
Yes, the KNS-80 RNAV was OK for this, but not any more because it does
not meet the CAA FM Immunity requirements. (this requirement claims to
address the proximity of the FM broadcast band to the FM aviation
band; not that anybody has ever come across any problems but the UK
CAA says so...)

it was my understanding that FM immunity issues with ILS approaches was
a known problem and not theoritical.