Not Garmin? Not legal.

Ron Levy said:
It's not in the FAA's job description to make press releases announcing that someone else has misinterpreted what the FAA said in their regs and AC's.
Click to expand...

...the "who can pee farther" game.

I guess I'm going to have to actually read the AC and draw my own quasi-legal conclusions.

I remember once, when I was a baby lawyer, asking my boss/mentor, "Can they do that?" He asked me, "Well, what does the law say?"

****ed me off, but he was right- go to the source.
 
What ever became of this....

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-2939.html

?

Ron Levy said:
Just spoke with the folks at AFS-410 -- the people who write the rules on GPS use. According to them, the ONLY things affected are RNAV SID's and RNAV STAR's -- and there ain't many of them. Substitution of GPS for ADF/DME is NOT affected, and use of approach-certified units for approaches is NOT affected. He said AOPA is blowing this all out of proportion, and reading into the AC stuff that isn't there. Also, there is no change to the GPS substitution table (Table 1-1-6) in the AIM.

IOW, keep doing business like you always have.
Click to expand...
 
markb5900 said:
Thanks for looking into that for us Ron.
Is AFS-410 going to be putting that in writing. I have read the AC and am more confused than I was to begin with.

Thanks again

Mark B
Click to expand...

Ron Levy said:
It's not in the FAA's job description to make press releases announcing that someone else has misinterpreted what the FAA said in their regs and AC's.
Click to expand...
No, but isn't it in their job description to write clear regs and ACs in the first place? As both AOPA and Mark have demonstrated, if their intent is as they presented it to you, they have failed in this instance. Therefore, they should make it clear, either through a press release or clarifying the AC. Well, that's my (frequently misguided) opinion, anyways! :yes::goofy:

And I'll add my thanks to those of the others for getting at least a verbal clarification!
 
It's not in the FAA's job description to make press releases announcing that someone else has misinterpreted what the FAA said in their regs and AC's.
Click to expand...
The new AIM text 1-2-3 says "Allowable RNAV Equipment... compliant with the equipment provisions of AC 90-100". This seems pretty hard to misinterpret.

I don't know what's in their job description, but I'd think there should be something in there about the rules being written down, and the writing accurately reflecting what they think the rules are, and when they write them wrong, to re-write them promptly and to publicize it.

I don't get the "Chicken Little" reference. AOPA's interpretation is just a straight-forward reading of what the FAA wrote in their own little rulebook.
-harry
 
At least AOPA will put their (right or wrong) opinions out in public and in "writing". I expect they'll eventually get a letter back from the FAA either explaining how AOPA misinterpreted the AC and changes, or (like the know icing definition), a "clarification" will be made.

Ron, did AFS-410 write or sign off on the AC and AIM changes referencing the AC?
 
Steve said:
What ever became of this....

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-2939.html

?
Click to expand...
One thing the new language in the AIM does make clear is that it is legal to use a "suitable" RNAV/GPS system to substitute for a non-operational DME on a VOR/DME approach, i.e., that Memphis ARTCC Air Traffic Division guidance is incorrect. From Section 1-2-3a:
1. As a substitute means of navigation guidance when a VOR, NDB, DME, or compass locator facility is out-of-service (that is, the navaid information is not available); an aircraft is not equipped with conventional equipment such as ADF or DME; or the conventional equipment such as ADF or DME on an aircraft is not operational. For example, if equipped with a suitable RNAV system, a pilot might hold over an out-of-service NDB. [emphasis added]
​
 
Ron Levy said:
Just spoke with the folks at AFS-410 -- the people who write the rules on GPS use. According to them, the ONLY things affected are RNAV SID's and RNAV STAR's -- and there ain't many of them. Substitution of GPS for ADF/DME is NOT affected, and use of approach-certified units for approaches is NOT affected. He said AOPA is blowing this all out of proportion, and reading into the AC stuff that isn't there. Also, there is no change to the GPS substitution table (Table 1-1-6) in the AIM.

IOW, keep doing business like you always have.
Click to expand...
Ron,

Do you mind if I post this on the red board?
 
Ron Levy said:
I seem to have about three hours more a day since I stopped looking there. Not sure I want to give back that time.
Click to expand...
Can't say I blame ya. Still some good information to be had, but lots of "stuff" to wade through first.
 
Can't vouche for the source, this is merely a copy from the red board...
 

Attachments

  • AC 100A.pdf
    330.7 KB · Views: 6
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top