Near accident
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Near accident
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a necessary component of EGPWS
No
Tell me why I shouldn't be worried
Looks like you know!
I'm pretty sure there has been a serious suggestion that plates should carry typical radalt readings for a NPA?
400' on a VOR approach WOULD raise a question mark and a few figures on the plate would be VERY useful
No
Tell me why I shouldn't be worried
Looks like you know!
I'm pretty sure there has been a serious suggestion that plates should carry typical radalt readings for a NPA?
400' on a VOR approach WOULD raise a question mark and a few figures on the plate would be VERY useful
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On most units from the USA...
...GPS is included for the very purpose of providing useful accurate position data, so the avionics function as intended.
To those that fit equipment that do not include GPS...the question must be asked, why not?
Could it be the old 'distrust' of the USA controlling the GPS signal(s)?
The country in question controls the VOR, do they not?
To those that fit equipment that do not include GPS...the question must be asked, why not?
Could it be the old 'distrust' of the USA controlling the GPS signal(s)?
The country in question controls the VOR, do they not?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Who can say?
Posts: 1,700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not permitted to rely on GPS as a primary means of navigation. Nothing, I suspect, to do with suspicion of GPS accuracy in this case - my guess (and it is only a guess) is that this A320 was fitted with INS.
Similarly, INS is not to be used as a primary means of navigation.
The question, however, has to be asked - in this situation, which would have been more accurate - GPS or VOR/DME?
Similarly, INS is not to be used as a primary means of navigation.
The question, however, has to be asked - in this situation, which would have been more accurate - GPS or VOR/DME?
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
411A - "the question must be asked, why not?" - cost, pure and simple. NOT anti US, however hard you try
Capt Stable - "my guess (and it is only a guess) is that this A320 was fitted with INS." - the report says GPS NOT FITTED, so the approach was, I understand, being flown 'raw data', but on a dodgy VOR
Capt Stable - "my guess (and it is only a guess) is that this A320 was fitted with INS." - the report says GPS NOT FITTED, so the approach was, I understand, being flown 'raw data', but on a dodgy VOR
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Generally it is not permitted to fly approaches using INS (twin IRS, anyway), so it is posssible this would HAVE to be flown in RD regardless of the INS state?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it really so...?
Interesting comments from some, who really should know better.
INS/GPS not approved as a primary means of navigation?
Hmm, have not noticed all that many VOR/DME's at 30West...or 140West for that matter. Last I noticed, pressure pattern navigation was not authorized on the OTS...but hey, maybe I missed an ammendment.
Some EGPWS are equipped with their own dedicated GPS (and terrain data base), thus are able to give warnings as needed.
Best piece of kit to come down the pike in many a moon, IMHO.
Should (IF used correctly) eliminate CFIT, and that is no small achievement, wouldn't you say?
Several US aircarriers use GPS for approaches (primary means of navigation)...Alaska Airlines the most, so far as I know.
Works good.
INS/GPS not approved as a primary means of navigation?
Hmm, have not noticed all that many VOR/DME's at 30West...or 140West for that matter. Last I noticed, pressure pattern navigation was not authorized on the OTS...but hey, maybe I missed an ammendment.
Some EGPWS are equipped with their own dedicated GPS (and terrain data base), thus are able to give warnings as needed.
Best piece of kit to come down the pike in many a moon, IMHO.
Should (IF used correctly) eliminate CFIT, and that is no small achievement, wouldn't you say?
Several US aircarriers use GPS for approaches (primary means of navigation)...Alaska Airlines the most, so far as I know.
Works good.
Last edited by 411A; 19th May 2003 at 09:28.
