Using a portable device as Primary moving map VFR.

B

bluesideup

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jun 20, 2014
Messages
673
Display Name
Display name:
bluesideup
Hi everyone, a few weeks ago I recall reading about a case where someone on the East Coast, and using a portable device as a moving map, was given a 709 by FAA when they violated a controlled area.

As I recall it was an FBO that had the device installed in the plane and the pilot just used it thinking it was legal.

What is the FAA's position on the portable non certified devices used as Moving map for anything?
ADSB Traffic?

I cannot find anything that they are legal to be used for anything other than static information and only when the Data can be proven to be current?

Thank you.
 
There’s nothing illegal about using a mobile gps. There is a problem with flying into restricted airspace no matter what tools you are using to help you navigate. Trying to use “my gps didn’t tell me” as an excuse for busting an airspace is gonna get you a 709 ride.

even using a fully legal IFR navigation system, you have to obey the airspace regs.
 
More than likely it wasn’t the fact that it was illegal to use under VFR, but rather he relied on it when it provided bad information.

I’m sure the 709 ride revolved around fixing one’s position under VFR, not how to determine whether a portable device is “legal”.
 
Hi, I agree that violating the airspace will get you a 709, the defense was the device did show it in the airspace and used as primary navigation tool.

Salty said:
There’s nothing illegal about using a mobile gps.
Click to expand...
What document is available that confirms that, everything I see is Static only, Charts, Calculator, Checklist, Flight plan...
 
bluesideup said:
Hi, I agree that violating the airspace will get you a 709, the defense was the device did show it in the airspace and used as primary navigation tool.


What document is available that confirms that, everything I see is Static only, Charts, Calculator, Checklist, Flight plan...
Click to expand...
You can use a sextant if you want and it helps you with situational awareness. It’s not a regulatory thing that needs approval. What you can’t do is use it as an excuse for being somewhere you should not have been.

If you said you flew over the White House because you took too long taking you star readings and calculating your location, you’d get a 709 ride……. If you take your star readings and stay where you’re allowed to be, then totally legal.

you can literally use anything you want as an aide to situational awareness.
 
Salty said:
You can use a sextant if you want and it helps you with situational awareness. It’s not a regulatory thing that needs approval. What you can’t do is use it as an excuse for being somewhere you should not have been.

If you said you flew over the White House because you took too long taking you star readings and calculating your location, you’d get a 709 ride……. If you take your star readings and stay where you’re allowed to be, then totally legal.

you can literally use anything you want as an aide to situational awareness.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure you’d be shot before reaching the wh
 
bluesideup said:
Hi everyone, a few weeks ago I recall reading about a case where someone on the East Coast, and using a portable device as a moving map, was given a 709 by FAA when they violated a controlled area.

As I recall it was an FBO that had the device installed in the plane and the pilot just used it thinking it was legal.

What is the FAA's position on the portable non certified devices used as Moving map for anything?
ADSB Traffic?

I cannot find anything that they are legal to be used for anything other than static information and only when the Data can be proven to be current?

Thank you.
Click to expand...

In VFR, you can fly with anything you want. I really wouldn't suggest it, but VFR rules don't even require you to have a map of any kind when flying. IFR is a totally different animal, and that's when the FAA starts making navigation devices illegal or legal. So flying VFR? You can use that moving map all you want, for any purpose you want. The reason being, you're supposed to be the one maintaining situational awareness and knowledge of where you and your plane are, and blaming your navigational aid is not going to relieve you of that responsibility.
 
LOL, 30 years ago I knew a pilot from Statesville, NC that drew his own charts. But, he was also flying an OX-5 powered Waco.
 
Wait you mean I can't just follow the magenta line and have to go around, over, or under airspace? Who knew?
 
SkyChaser said:
In VFR, you can fly with anything you want. I really wouldn't suggest it, but VFR rules don't even require you to have a map of any kind when flying.
Click to expand...
I do not believe you are correct. We have to have a ll the information relevant for the flight, and I believe this is given to imply a current chart or electronic equivalent.
 
steingar said:
I do not believe you are correct. We have to have a ll the information relevant for the flight, and I believe this is given to imply a current chart or electronic equivalent.
Click to expand...

14 CFR § 91.103 - Preflight action
Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. This information must include -

(a) For a flight under IFR or a flight not in the vicinity of an airport, weather reports and forecasts, fuel requirements, alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed, and any known traffic delays of which the pilot in command has been advised by ATC;

(b) For any flight, runway lengths at airports of intended use, and the following takeoff and landing distance information:

(1) For civil aircraft for which an approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual containing takeoff and landing distance data is required, the takeoff and landing distance data contained therein; and

(2) For civil aircraft other than those specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, other reliable information appropriate to the aircraft, relating to aircraft performance under expected values of airport elevation and runway slope, aircraft gross weight, and wind and temperature.

I don't see maps included, and they're not listed under things required to be on board an aircraft, nor on the list of equipment required under VFR. I would not fly without a map, but that doesn't mean they're absolutely required. A pilot could technically look at the map before his flight and go fly relying on his memory and "be familiar with all available information".
 
From the FAA FAQ:

What is the FAA policy for carrying current charts?
The specific FAA regulation, FAR 91.103 "Preflight Actions," states that each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. Although the regulation does not specifically require it, you should always carry a current chart with you in flight. Expired charts may not show frequency changes or newly constructed obstructions, both of which when unknown could be a hazard.

The only FAA/FAR requirements that pertain to charts are:

  • Title 14 CFR section 91.503[a] (Large and Turbojet powered aircraft)
  • Title 14 CFR section 135.83 (Air Carriers-Little Airplane)
  • Title 14 CFR section 121.549 (Air Carrier-Big Airplanes)
The FAA's July/August 1997 issue of FAA Aviation News on "current" aeronautical charts provided the following information:

  1. "You can carry old charts in your aircraft." "It is not FAA policy to violate anyone for having outdated charts in the aircraft."
  2. "Not all pilots are required to carry a chart." "91.503..requires the pilot in command of large and multiengine airplanes to have charts." "Other operating sections of the FAR such as Part 121 and Part 135 operations have similar requirements."
  3. ..."since some pilots thought they could be violated for having outdated or no charts on board during a flight, we need to clarify an important issue. As we have said, it is NOT FAA policy to initiate enforcement action against a pilot for having an old chart on board or no chart on board." That's because there is no regulation on the issue.
  4. ..."the issue of current chart data bases in handheld GPS receivers is a non-issue because the units are neither approved by the FAA or required for flight, nor do panel-mounted VFR-only GPS receivers have to have a current data base because, like handheld GPSreceivers, the pilot is responsible for pilotage under VFR.
  5. "If a pilot is involved in an enforcement investigation and there is evidence that the use of an out-of-date chart, no chart, or an out-of-date database contributed to the condition that brought on the enforcement investigation, then that information could be used in any enforcement action that might be taken."
Click to expand...
 
All I can say is if things go south and you don't have any kind go map in the airplane I think the FAA will take a dim view of it.
 
steingar said:
I do not believe you are correct. We have to have a ll the information relevant for the flight, and I believe this is given to imply a current chart or electronic equivalent.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. You don't have to have anything in the plane with you. Its all preflight action. Hows that chart gonna work in a Breezy?
 
steingar said:
All I can say is if things go south and you don't have any kind go map in the airplane I think the FAA will take a dim view of it.
Click to expand...

From the FAA FAQ linked above:
"It is not FAA policy to violate anyone for having outdated charts in the aircraft."
..."since some pilots thought they could be violated for having outdated or no charts on board during a flight, we need to clarify an important issue. As we have said, it is NOT FAA policy to initiate enforcement action against a pilot for having an old chart on board or no chart on board." That's because there is no regulation on the issue.
Click to expand...
 
1) One must be careful not to run afoul of the CFR for preflight action, requiring the pilot to obtain “all available information” concerning any flight not in the vicinity of an airport. One might be able to do that without a chart, but it would be difficult.

2) I’ve related this before, but leaving N. Little Rock airport in an open cockpit biplane, I was using a Garmin portable to navigate, since paper charts were extremely difficult to use with all the wind in the cockpit. I thought I was staying clear of airspace to avoid, staying below KLIT’s Class C. Then I saw I was almost over a very long runway. I had stumbled into Little Rock AFB Class D without making contact. Oops! I hightailed it out of there, and getting home I filed my first and only NASA report, outlining how overlapping airspace depictions on moving maps could lead a pilot to this sort of blunder. Never heard a word from anyone. But that, combined with pilot carelessness, is how these things can happen. Not to say in complicated airspace they might not happen even with a chart right in front of you.
 
steingar said:
I do not believe you are correct. We have to have a ll the information relevant for the flight, and I believe this is given to imply a current chart or electronic equivalent.
Click to expand...

This is not true. The askcfi link I posted above references a FAA policy post on the topic which says:

…”since some pilots thought they could be violated for having outdated or no charts on board during a flight, we need to clarify an important issue. As we have said, it is NOT FAA policy to initiate enforcement action against a pilot for having an old chart on board or no chart on board.” That’s because there is no regulation on the issue.
Click to expand...
 
steingar said:
I do not believe you are correct. We have to have a ll the information relevant for the flight, and I believe this is given to imply a current chart or electronic equivalent.
Click to expand...

Another old wives tail. I have never read a regulation requiring any sort of charts, or gps required for VFR flight. Yes we are required to know all pertinent information prior to flight, but nothing saying a chart is required.

I am kind of surprised there are pilots that think this.
 
FastEddieB said:
1) One must be careful not to run afoul of the CFR for preflight action, requiring the pilot to obtain “all available information” concerning any flight not in the vicinity of an airport. One might be able to do that without a chart, but it would be difficult.

2) I’ve related this before, but leaving N. Little Rock airport in an open cockpit biplane, I was using a Garmin portable to navigate, since paper charts were extremely difficult to use with all the wind in the cockpit. I thought I was staying clear of airspace to avoid, staying below KLIT’s Class C. Then I saw I was almost over a very long runway. I had stumbled into Little Rock AFB Class D without making contact. Oops! I hightailed it out of there, and getting home I filed my first and only NASA report, outlining how overlapping airspace depictions on moving maps could lead a pilot to this sort of blunder. Never heard a word from anyone. But that, combined with pilot carelessness, is how these things can happen. Not to say in complicated airspace they might not happen even with a chart right in front of you.
Click to expand...

My instructor flies following the highways, smokestacks, lake and train tracks. Over time you just learn the route and by maintaining VFR you’ll have visual of any changes in terrain / buildings, etc.
 
Hi.
There is a lot of misinterpretation and lack of clarity in the regs and I just wish some day someone takes action to clear up some of these, add to it all the eApps / mobile devices, moving maps, and things can get very confusing.
Yes, more information is better, most of the time, the question is when does it become more a distraction than be of any help. My opinion is stick to the basics, use your trusted / certified equipment and don't rely on anything that you may not have working in the next few minutes / seconds. Basics should rule.
I like to stay with what the FAA recommends and try Not to read between the lines, but I will admit that at times, and I've been at it for a while, it can get very frustrating.
 

Attachments

  • LA-TACuseUL.jpg
    LA-TACuseUL.jpg
    369.7 KB · Views: 7
bluesideup said:
Hi.
There is a lot of misinterpretation and lack of clarity in the regs and I just wish some day someone takes action to clear up some of these, add to it all the eApps / mobile devices, moving maps, and things can get very confusing.
Yes, more information is better, most of the time, the question is when does it become more a distraction than be of any help. My opinion is stick to the basics, use your trusted / certified equipment and don't rely on anything that you may not have working in the next few minutes / seconds. Basics should rule.
I like to stay with what the FAA recommends and try Not to read between the lines, but I will admit that at times, and I've been at it for a while, it can get very frustrating.
Click to expand...
To fly specific procedures, you must have the necessary documents in the aircraft. An approach plate for example.
 
Salty said:
To fly specific procedures, you must have the necessary documents in the aircraft. An approach plate for example.
Click to expand...

Also not required. When I brought the Comanche back from Florida in 09 nobody had charts or plates available. I wrote down what was necessary to fly the approach in Kentucky by looking at the plate on Airnav, but it was not a copy of the plate nor did it have all the information from the plate and I was perfectly legal.

You also dont need a SID/STAR in the plane, you're just going to be writing a lot down.
 
From what I was taught / allowed by my PPL and Instrument DPEs, as well as my CFI and CFII:

You can use a tablet with GPS moving map in VFR, and heck even in IFR. It can show traffic, weather, overlaid approach plates, etc. It can't be your primary navigation source, as it's not certified. It is however a perfectly legal and acceptable way to carry your approach plates.

If you find it a helpful addition - and I do - then go forth and tablet away. I think it would be odd not to take advantage of it, but that's my opinion and preference, and what I've been repeatedly taught by several people. No shade to anyone who doesn't fly that way.
 
EdFred said:
Also not required. When I brought the Comanche back from Florida in 09 nobody had charts or plates available. I wrote down what was necessary to fly the approach in Kentucky by looking at the plate on Airnav, but it was not a copy of the plate nor did it have all the information from the plate and I was perfectly legal.

You also dont need a SID/STAR in the plane, you're just going to be writing a lot down.
Click to expand...
I may be wrong there. It's what I was taught, but I can find no reg to back it up. One could argue that it's a bad idea to fly an approach without the plate.
 
Just the further move this thread away from the original topic...

It is my understanding that the GPS database for an IFR flight doesn't have to be up to date. Only that all the fixes for the flight be correct. So your database in your 430w could be a year out of date but as long as none of the fixes you're using have changed, you're still legal.

Now I'm just going to make some popcorn, sit back and watch.
 
Does the phrase:

"There is no such thing as a horse too dead to beat"

work here?
 
WDD said:
You can use a tablet with GPS moving map in VFR, and heck even in IFR.
Click to expand...
Other than what your CFI... said what source specifies that you can, and if you do / have to use it how do you justify it if something happens and you admitted that you used it?

WDD said:
It can show traffic, weather, overlaid approach plates, etc. It can't be your primary navigation source, as it's not certified. It is however a perfectly legal and acceptable way to carry your approach plates.
Click to expand...
Yes I think that also by FAA's definition that would be acceptable.

WDD said:
If you find it a helpful addition - and I do - then go forth and tablet away. I think it would be odd not to take advantage of it, but that's my opinion and preference, and what I've been repeatedly taught by several people.
Click to expand...
It can become a problem when pilots get to the point where they do not know how to use their instrumentation in the acft and spend a lot of time just using the mobile device.
 
bluesideup said:
Hi.
There is a lot of misinterpretation and lack of clarity in the regs and I just wish some day someone takes action to clear up some of these, add to it all the eApps / mobile devices, moving maps, and things can get very confusing.
Yes, more information is better, most of the time, the question is when does it become more a distraction than be of any help.
Click to expand...

That last sentence is of course up to the judgment of the PIC.

My opinion is stick to the basics, use your trusted / certified equipment and don't rely on anything that you may not have working in the next few minutes / seconds. Basics should rule.
I like to stay with what the FAA recommends and try Not to read between the lines, but I will admit that at times, and I've been at it for a while, it can get very frustrating.
Click to expand...

The FAA covers the use of VFR and IFR GPS receivers in AIM 1-1-17. Specifically, see Note 4 of Table 1-1-6, which states:

"VFR and hand−held GPS systems are not authorized for IFR navigation, instrument approaches, or as a primary instrument flight reference. During IFR operations they may be considered only an aid to situational awareness."​

Since this thread is about VFR operations, note that the above passage clearly says that it only applies to instrument flight and IFR operations. No reading between the lines required.

Note: The current AIM can be downloaded here:

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/
 
Last edited:
Salty said:
I may be wrong there. It's what I was taught, but I can find no reg to back it up. One could argue that it's a bad idea to fly an approach without the plate.
Click to expand...

Back a million years ago when approach charts were in books (so, 2009 or 2010), I flew down to the Dallas area. When I got there, it turned out I was now over an unforecast undercast. As a result, I did not have the approach charts for the area with me. Probably a bad decision, but there I was. I had a current GPS database, but didn't know the altitudes for the approach, so I just asked the controller for them, he told me and cleared me for the approach. It certainly didn't rise to the level of an emergency, so I didn't consider it to be using a PIC's "emergency authority". I got what I needed, flew the approach, broke out well above minimums (like 2000 OVC I think), and landed. No big deal.
 
bluesideup said:
Other than what your CFI... said what source specifies that you can, and if you do / have to use it how do you justify it if something happens and you admitted that you used it?
Click to expand...

The FARs are in general, not "permissive" - they don't tell us what we CAN do. Rather, they usually tell us what we CAN'T do. If there is no rule against it, you can do it.

You won't find a FAR specifically saying you can take off in 20 knots of wind (or 5, or 10, or whatever), either, but of course it's perfectly fine to do so.
 
Good point Russ. In addition to my two DPEs and CFI CFIIs that have the opinion that it’s allowable, and after two written and two oral exams it didn’t come up, and I never ran access anything after pouring through the FAR AIM brick of a book for test prep, I’m confident for me that I’m not illegal is using a tablet either VFR or IFR.
 
Fun fact - I’m my IFR oral chatting about partial panel loosing the attitude indicator, the DPE stated that he would / I should also reference the tablet’s attitude indicator (in FFlight for example). Something to the effect of “You’re in an emergency - use anything you can - don’t be an idiot and ignore it”.
 
WDD said:
Fun fact - I’m my IFR oral chatting about partial panel loosing the attitude indicator, the DPE stated that he would / I should also reference the tablet’s attitude indicator (in FFlight for example). Something to the effect of “You’re in an emergency - use anything you can - don’t be an idiot and ignore it”.
Click to expand...

In an emergency, you do what you have to do to survive.

FAR 91.3 (b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
 
donjohnston said:
Just the further move this thread away from the original topic...

It is my understanding that the GPS database for an IFR flight doesn't have to be up to date. Only that all the fixes for the flight be correct. So your database in your 430w could be a year out of date but as long as none of the fixes you're using have changed, you're still legal.

Now I'm just going to make some popcorn, sit back and watch.
Click to expand...

The challenge for the average pilot is to know that the information in the out-of-date database is still correct.

Of course, there is also the fun part of the certainty that even a current database still has errors.
 
donjohnston said:
Just the further move this thread away from the original topic...

It is my understanding that the GPS database for an IFR flight doesn't have to be up to date. Only that all the fixes for the flight be correct. So your database in your 430w could be a year out of date but as long as none of the fixes you're using have changed, you're still legal.

Now I'm just going to make some popcorn, sit back and watch.
Click to expand...
The notes for AIM Table 1-1-6 cover that.

Note 2 applies to IFR en route and IFR terminal operations:

"Requires verification of data for correctness if database is expired."​

Note 3 applies to IFR approach operations:

"Requires current database or verification that the procedure has not been amended since the expiration of the database."​

The en route requirement seems problematic, because how do you check every en route fix, course, minimum altitude, etc. that you might use when you don't know before the flight which ones ATC will assign? The approach requirement is easier, because all you have to do is check the amendment date on the approach chart. However there is still the problem that you may end up having to fly an approach that you weren't expecting in advance.

Note that it is also necessary to check the AFM supplement for your GPS receiver, because some of them don't allow using an expired database.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top