TSO C129 or TSO C146 (FDE) How to tell??

[Big Kev]

How do you tell whether the GPS installed in the aircraft you are flying is TSO-C129 or TSO-C146 capable?

It doesn't say it on the unit itself and I have scrolled through all the pages but to no avail as to determine whether it is approriate for certain phases of flight - i.e -> RNAV approaches.

Thanks for the tips in advance!


BK

:ok:

[Horatio Leafblower]

Read the bloody manual! :uhoh:

[PlankBlender]

Read the bloody manual! :uhoh:


..which incidentally, you have to have on board by law in order to use the unit for navigation, so don't get caught out in a incident, having to specify GPS navigation when asked, and then not being able to produce the handbook.. if the incident is somehow related to the use of the GPS unit and you didn't have the handbook on board, you might find yourself in a real pickle :eek:

Having the quick reference handy may actually be worthwhile, though, especially for older, not so user-friendly units..

[WannaBeBiggles]

Slight topic drift, but does anyone know the difference between a C145[a] and a C146[a] unit?

[Icarus53]

as to determine whether it is approriate for certain phases of flight - i.e -> RNAV approaches.

Units certified under either of these TSOs are suitable for RNAV approaches. Is that what you're trying to figure out?

[Jabawocky]

This may help some folk understand it all better.........


Navigation Systems
GPS See AIP Gen section 1.5. GPS for IFR use must comply with TSO. A GPS compliant with TSO C129a2 can be used for enroute and terminal area navigation. C129a1 can conduct non-precision approaches. However to take advantage of lower weather minima a VOR or ADF need to be onboard and at the destination. See the AIP for details of operational and weather requirements for destinations and alternate airports with and without ground aids.
GPS compliant with the new TSO C146a are WAAS upgradeable and are expected to be approved for sole means of navigation for enroute navigation and also (in future) for precision approaches. CASA staff have confirmed that the US WAAS correction signal does cover Australia, and they will progressively introduce precision GPS approaches in the future.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Big Kev, its a good question, and I should know the answer - but I don't. The answer should lie in the manual - which must be carried in the aeroplane.

What is the issue?


TSO C146a ..... are expected to be approved for sole means of navigation for enroute navigation


As far as I can see this is the only issue that is relevant to TSO129/146 debate at the moment.

It doesn't seem to be a big deal when flying in SSR covered airspace - as I am often offered long GPS based routes by ATC eg yesterday I was offered (and accepted) "Gladstone direct Townsville", rather than the flight-planned GLA-RK-PROBO-MK-CLIFT-ALISN-YBTL.

It may be a bigger issue outside of radar coverage - or for aircraft engaged in charter and RPT, but didn't stop me from flying Tennant Creek - direct Broome last year.


CASA staff have confirmed that the US WAAS correction signal does cover Australia


Don't know if this is so Jaba! The Garmin 496 is WAAS capable - but does not pick up any signal when flying around Qld!

Dr :8

[PlankBlender]

Units certified under either of these TSOs are suitable for RNAV approaches. Is that what you're trying to figure out?


Icarus, that statement is not quite complete, and may be misleading someone into thinking they can just fly any RNAV approach with any GPS.

AIP GEN 1.5 8.5.5.4 in the table under RNAV(GNSS) Non-precision approaches, number 4 says: "If a TSO-C129 or a C129a receiver is used, an alternate instrument approach utilising ground based navigation aids must be available."

For example, if I had a TSO-C129 GPS and an NDB, but no VOR in my aeroplane, I could no longer fly IFR into Avalon as they just decommissioned their NDB..

The above AIP reference, together with GEN 1.5 8.5.5.3 and ENR 1.1 72.3.1 means that TSO-145/6 certified GPS (145 and 146 are treated the same at this time AFAIK) are good for navigation where GPS is the sole navaid used. The Garmin 430W/530W would be such TSO-145 certified units.

Also, just for completeness' sake, make sure you're actually legal to fly IFR with GPS: From CAAP 179A-1(1): "Prior to using GPS in IFR operations pilots must have completed a course of ground training, based on the syllabus contained in Appendix IV of CAO 40.2.1. Satisfactory completion of the course and demonstration of competence in operation must be certified in the body of the pilot’s logbook in the following format: [...]"

And then of course the GPS must be endorsed as part of the IR, separately for RNAV NPAs and GPS/DME arrivals, and you must satisfy the recency requirement..

Don't we just love the regulator, they're making it so easy by spreading out the information over fifteen different publications :E

[OZBUSDRIVER]

CASA staff have confirmed that the US WAAS correction signal does cover Australia

???? not sure if that would be very correct. The yanks flew their bird back toward the west coast, the footprint used to touch the east coast of Aus. What does cover Aus right now is the Japanese MTSAT. (My handheld Magellan goes WAAS.)

For Australia to get WAAS right now would take installation of ground stations linked back to two ref stations (we have one already in Can'tberra) to transmit a correction signal to the MTSAT. This will not happen any time soon. The Feds will want someone to pay for it.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

PlankBlender, not quite correct there. If you wanted to fly into AV with a GPS(TSO129a) and an NDB, you only have to carry an ALT for that destination.

Any aerodrome with only an NPA requires an ALT. Doesn't mean you cannot attempt an approach.


edit-correct name

[Jabawocky]

Gee :\ VFR ops sound rather appealing now don't they!

With respect to the WAAS thing, I lifted that extract from another publication, i am not aware of it being available here, i think its on with ADSB and no more taxes, pigs flying.....:E

J

[PlankBlender]

Thanks for the clarification ozbusdriver, I must have got confused by the use of the word "alternate" in point 4 the table as it states "alternate instrument approach", not "alternate aerodrome/destination".

There's a useful diagram in the CAAP (http://www.casa.gov.au/download/CAAPs/ops/179a_1.pdf) on page 47 that makes this a bit clearer.

One thing to watch out for, when planning that alternate for the TSO-129 approach is this, from the same CAAP on page 46, clarifying numbers 3 and 4 from said AIP table:

"When using a TSO-C129 receiver, or a C146a receiver with a prediction that FDE will not be available, and the forecast weather is below the alternate weather minima, the alternate must be suitable for visual approach or an instrument approach using ground-based navigation aids."

Currently revising for the IREX exam, I hope they have a question about this :ok:

[Icarus53]

PlankBlender - thanks for the expansion (and revision). I gave the simplest response possible without actually going to the books, but I can see how that may have been misleading.

Good luck with the IREX - I suspect you won't see anything on this stuff in there as RNAV en-route is considered as part of a separate training syllabus (completed for log book entry approving GPS as primary means). Perhaps that will change in future as GPS becomes the baseline for IFR navigation!

[Capt Fathom]

yesterday I was offered (and accepted) "Gladstone direct Townsville", rather than the flight-planned GLA-RK-PROBO-MK-CLIFT-ALISN-YBTL.

To keep you out of everyone's way!:E

[Lasiorhinus]

Currently revising for the IREX exam, I hope they have a question about this :ok:

Good luck on the IREX Exam. You can use your ASIC Card for ID, but if you want a coffee you'll need to get money from the ATM Machine around the corner. On some of the new ones, you can type your PIN Number directly onto the LCD Display.:}

[PlankBlender]

Las, either I'm not getting your wit or whatever you're smoking must be pretty darn good :E

[OzExpat]

WannaBeBiggles wrote...
Slight topic drift, but does anyone know the difference between a C145[a] and a C146[a] unit?

TSO C-145 is intended for aircraft that have a Flight Management Computer. TSO C-146 is the stand-alone version for everyone else. The version of C-146 equipment that I've seen to date (i.e. just one) include ILS receivers and VHF/COM transceivers, to make them suitable as a complete change of nav/com system in non-FMC-equipped aircraft.

[Nivo]

Big Kev,

Look in the Flight Manual. I have just been involved with the installation of a GNS530W and it is not certified for use under the IFR until a CASA approved Flight Manual Supplement (1 month and $160!!) is inserted in the aircraft's Flight Manual.

Nivo