27/09 and Horatio
Lets try and understand this.
An IFR GPS is approved under TSO C129, 146 etc.
Having an out of date database does not affect the IFR certification of the receiver,
however, if flying with a non current database, the legislation is quite specific about flight below route LSALT and flight in controlled airspace.
With a non current database, you cannot descend below LSALT solely by reference to the GPS with the non current database,
i.e no GPS arrival or RNAV approach.
In controlled airspace you cannot be seperated as an RNAV capable aircraft.
Further legislation caters for the integrity of pilot entered waypoint data, how it is to be verified.
The currency of a database is an operational issue, no different to your AIP or Jepp currency, it is not a maintenance issue.
Some engineering types in CASA have tried to pervert an operational currency issue to a maintenance activity, it is not,
even though they will scream and protest otherwise.
Changing the GPS software or firmware, on the other hand, is a valid maintenance issue.
You need to be licenced to do things that affect the IFR certification.
You dont need to be licenced to update your charts or your database, these are flying operational issues.
Must we certify on the maintenance release for a planned IFR flight that we are flying with current charts? these guys seem to think so!
These are the same people who insist that cleaning your windscreen or washing your aircraft is a "MAINTENANCE" activity.
Given the ADF background of a lot of these experts, such a stance is to be expected, but not forgiven.
I suspect that most likely very few of these experts would have ever updated a Garmin / King etc datacard
with all the associated verification and integrity checks built in by the approved supplier of the update.
How about we enter our medical expiry and rating expiry on the M/R while we're at it?
When will common sense and industry knowledge prevail within CASA?