What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

IFR training in an RV-7? I did it!

DakotaHawk

Well Known Member
I completed my RV-7 in 2009 and have over 1100 hours on it to date. Living in the Seattle area, there are a lot of weather issues to deal with. In the past few years, there have been a few times that I?ve had to cancel planned trips due to weather. I?ve also had to turn back from coming over the Cascades due to getting stuck VFR on top of the clouds. It?s never fun at the end of a trip to come home and spend the last hour of the flight looking for a hole in the clouds to circle down through. It?s not very safe either!

1005.JPG


So last year I decided it was time to move forward on my Instrument ticket. My goal was to use my own plane to train in, so the first hurdle was to put in an instrument panel that would be legal, and would be easy to fly on instruments. I wasn?t interested in the basic six-pack with vacuum gauges and a VOR. No! I wanted to have something that I would be comfortable with.
Oshkosh is a great place to look at the latest and greatest. I spent an entire week with one thought running through my head ? IFR Instrument Panel! By the end of the week, I had decided on my setup and began planning the new panel. The legacy Dynon EFIS and EMS would go away. The Garmin transponder and comm radio are out also.
My new panel has Dynon Skyview 10? Touch and Dynon Skyview 7? EFIS, Avidyne IFD440 Nav/Com/GPS, PS Engineering audio panel, Dynon Comm, Dynon (Trig) Transponder, Dynon autopilot, and meets the 2020 ADSB requirements. I cut the new panel and had a friend do the graphics and silkscreen work for me. The old equipment was removed, and new equipment installed.

Photo%20Mar%2006%2C%2015%2011%2036.jpg


I spent a few months testing the new equipment, learning how to use the Avidyne, and looking for any bugs. I found a couple of minor issues that were easy to clear up. The worst issue though, was the Nav radio (IFD 440 Nav). Although the glideslope on an ILS approach was rock steady, the localizer needle was very erratic. It took a lot of troubleshooting to figure this one out, but I finally narrowed it down to one of the BNC ends on a short coax from the Nav/GS splitter to the Avidyne radio. And sure enough, when I examined the BNC ends, I found one pin had not been fully inserted in the assembly. Here?s a video of what the localizer looked like with the bad BNC pin, and a picture of the bad BNC pin next to a good BNC connector.

https://youtu.be/wTDYREBJ_3A


Photo%20Nov%2009%2C%2010%2057%2041.jpg


With everything working correctly, it was time to begin IFR training. I wasn?t interested in going to one of the local schools, renting a G1000 Cessna 172, and spending thousands of dollars to learn a system that I would never use again. I wanted to train in my RV-7, so I had to find an instructor who would be willing to fly with me. Seattle has a great flying community, and I was able to find several CFIIs who could do the job. After flying with several CFIIs, I settled down to three instructors who would team-teach me.
I was concerned about the ability of the RV-7 as an Instrument platform. Would it be too twitchy? Too nimble? There?s a reason why so many people get their Instrument ticket in a Cessna. It?s just a good, stable, reliable airplane. I have done a lot of aerobatics, formation flight, cross country, and sight-seeing in my RV-7. Now it was time to see if it could survive in the Instrument training world.

Photo%20Aug%2006%2C%2019%2056%2055.jpg


We began training with standard maneuvers ? except the standard maneuvers were done with my foggles on! And the RV-7 behaved? OK. Not perfect, but not bad! I had to learn to have a very smooth, light touch on the stick, and really focus on the gauges. It took a few hours of maneuvers to get my skills up to par. Holding altitude, heading, and speed isn?t easy at first, but eventually I figured it out.
Approaches, Holds, and course intercepts turned out to be extremely easy with the equipment I had installed. One of my instructors said that flying with my panel felt like cheating, because the instrument scan all happens on one instrument, the auto-pilot can fly straight and level (or a heading and altitude) while I was trying to plan the next maneuver. We moved onto the Cross-country flight relatively quickly, with a flight from Renton (KRNT) to Hillsboro (KHIO) to Astoria (KAST) to Hoquiem (KHQM) to Renton (KRNT). Along the way, we did an ILS approach to full stop, a Localizer to full stop, a VOR to the missed approach, and an RNAV-GPS/circle to land. The cross-country was done in about 75% IMC conditions, and my RV-7 performed wonderfully!

Photo%20Jun%2016%2C%2011%2058%2042.jpg


Fast forward a few months, I had racked up a whopping 41.0 hrs of actual/simulated IMC, and it was time to take my checkride. Once again, I had to find a DPE who would be willing to do an Instrument checkride in an RV-7. Sure enough, I found my victim. I briefed him on my equipment, the experimental RV-7, the tailwheel, the panel, etc. Oddly enough, he still agreed to go along for the ride! Because of the experimental nature of the plane, as well as the engine, as well as the panel, I had to be prepared to answer all questions about airworthiness! We spent about 45 minutes going over airframe and engine logs, discussing the work and logbook entries that I could do as the builder, and then going over ADs and service bulletins for the plane, engine, propeller, and equipment. Finally, he declared that my RV-7 may indeed be airworthy, and we completed the checkride.

Photo%20Dec%2014%2C%2019%2054%2013.jpg


In summary, if you feel like you?ve got a good handle on flying your RV, if you are very comfortable with the instrumentation on your panel, and if you don?t want to go back to a Cessna for your Instrument ticket, there?s really no reason for you not to use your RV!
Good luck!
 
Me Too

Thanks for your post and congrats. I too am learning instruments in my RV-7A. I have 400 hours flying it and found that the maneuvers were not as bad as some said they would be. I also didn't want to learn in an other plane. I did do some research first and found an examiner who would do my check ride in my plane. I am about half way through the flying part and studying for my knowledge test.
I find the knowledge part way harder than the flying. Learning all the stuff i will never use is a drag. I'm 55 now and been vfr flying since 1992. It is a little harder to learn when your older but I also have a lot of cross country experience so that helps. This is definitely making me a better pilot. I hope to be able to post a successful check ride in the spring.
 
Scott,

Great write up - thanks. I got my IFR ticket in my Cherokee with steam gauges but am really looking forward to completing my -9A which will have the latest from Dynon. The transition will be interesting! Would love to go for a motivational ride with you sometime.

Lars
 
Congrats...

I asked the DPE that I did my PPL with if he does IFR checks in Experimentals.

He said, "Depends on the Experimental."

I showed him mine and he said "She'll do."

I considered that a compliment. :)
 
I find the knowledge part way harder than the flying. Learning all the stuff i will never use is a drag.

Yes, I think most will agree, the instrument written is more difficult than the private. But, I always felt it was somewhat relevant to instrument flying, at least more so than the private written was to private flying. Can you give me a few examples of what you think is useless? I?m just curious.
 
Scott,

How much were you allowed to use the autopilot during the ride?

Couple of CFIIs I use as safety pilots on proficiency flights expect me to demonstrate competency with the autopilot besides hand flying.

John Siebold
 
John,

The question of "how much autopilot to use during the checkride?" was something that I discussed with all three of my CFIIs.

The first guy, who is very "old school", said that I may be asked to demonstrate it, but not to expect to get to use it for anything other than a basic demonstration during the checkride. The second guy, who is also "old school" said that I could expect to use it when things got real busy in the cockpit, for example to keep wings level while copying clearances. The third guy said to go ahead and use it in all phases of flight, and explain to the DPE when and why I'm using it. I went with the third guy's suggestions.

I used the autopilot during about 80% of cruise/level flight, but turned it off occasionally just to show I could keep the plane level wings/level altitude without the autopilot. I also used the autopilot as ATC was giving me radar vectors to the approach. I made sure to disengage the autopilot before crossing the FAF, although I did re-engage it after the FAF on two of the approaches.

Finally, on the final approach to KRNT, which was a RNAV/GPS approach, the DPE failed my primary EFIS. When he did that, I engaged the autopilot and let it fly the approach while I reconfigured the secondary/passenger EFIS to show the approach plate. All told, I probably used the autopilot for about 50% of my checkride.
 
The current ACS (nee PTS) requires that one of the 3 required approaches be flown with the use of the autopilot (if equipped). It is silent as to enroute use.
 
I made sure to disengage the autopilot before crossing the FAF, although I did re-engage it after the FAF on two of the approaches.
e.
What was the point of the disengagement/re-engagement?
I am surprised the examiner allowed you so much autopilot use.
 
Great write up and congratulations! I completed my first 20 hours of 'primary instrument training' in my VFR RV6 to save cost. During the first few hours I wasn't sure I would be able to do it but soon learned what it took to keep the right side up. I then switched to an IFR equipped C172 and was amazed at how long I could look at a map and the plane wouldn't change altitude or roll off course!
Congratulations again and be safe!
 
Recently flew my IFR check up here in the Seattle area... My DPE actually allowed use of the autopilot throughout the entire flight, requiring only one approach to be hand flown.

Biggest reason to use the autopilot as much as possible is to show proficiency with the equipment available to you within your aircraft. Secondary to that is the use of good resource management for the busy phases of flight.

Scott's plane is definitely a beautiful example of what can be done in RV's! Now, if I could only convince him to do my panel for me. :p
 
What was the point of the disengagement/re-engagement?
I am surprised the examiner allowed you so much autopilot use.

The disengagement/reengagement was due to the internal thought conflict set up by my CFIIs when one told me that I wouldn't be allowed to use the A/P and the others said to go ahead and use it. :confused::confused::confused:
 
All told, I probably used the autopilot for about 50% of my checkride.

Not fair!!! :D

(IFR rating 1992, steam, no GPS, ADF approaches, no moving map--auto-pilot? What's an auto-pilot? Flew the entire checkride on partial panel...)

Congrats on your new rating! :)
 
Last edited:
?Required? equipment for IFR training/check-ride

When I do my IFR training I?d also like to use my own airplane to do my training in. My question is regarding ?required? equipment. I?m planning on installing a complete Garmin panel with all the bells and whistles which will include one of the GTN series radios (625, 635, or 650) depending on what?s ?required? for IFR flight training and check-out. As I?m sure you guys know, the 625 is only a GPS based navigator where as the 650 has a built-in VOR/Loc/Glide-slope capabilities. Even though having all of the bells and whistles that the 650 offers would be nice, I think I?d be very happy with only having the GPS based navigational abilities that the 625 offers.....plus, the 625 is much more affordable that the 650. So, my question is, is it ?required? to do your training and check-ride in an aircraft that has the ability/equipment to perform VOR/Loc/Glide-slope navigation/approaches as would be the case if the aircraft were equipped with equipment such as a 650, or is it acceptable to do your training/check-ride in an aircraft that only has GPS based navigational/approach abilities such as what the 625 offers?? Oh, BTW, if I?m able to go with the 625 I?ll have two stand-alone COM?s, so I won?t need the COM features that the 635 or 650 offer.

Thanks
Mark
 
When I do my IFR training I?d also like to use my own airplane to do my training in. My question is regarding ?required? equipment. I?m planning on installing a complete Garmin panel with all the bells and whistles which will include one of the GTN series radios (625, 635, or 650) depending on what?s ?required? for IFR flight training and check-out. As I?m sure you guys know, the 625 is only a GPS based navigator where as the 650 has a built-in VOR/Loc/Glide-slope capabilities. Even though having all of the bells and whistles that the 650 offers would be nice, I think I?d be very happy with only having the GPS based navigational abilities that the 625 offers.....plus, the 625 is much more affordable that the 650. So, my question is, is it ?required? to do your training and check-ride in an aircraft that has the ability/equipment to perform VOR/Loc/Glide-slope navigation/approaches as would be the case if the aircraft were equipped with equipment such as a 650, or is it acceptable to do your training/check-ride in an aircraft that only has GPS based navigational/approach abilities such as what the 625 offers?? Oh, BTW, if I?m able to go with the 625 I?ll have two stand-alone COM?s, so I won?t need the COM features that the 635 or 650 offer.

Thanks
Mark

Believe it or not, you can legally fly IFR with something like Sporty's SP-400 handheld. You certify it by performing and logging the appropriate VOR checks. Keep in mind, legal and safe are two different things. But for training and your check ride, that might just work for your.
 
Thanks for the reply Bill. So the question is, with the GPS knowing where the VOR is, can you ?simulate? the VOR navigation/approaches that?s required for IFR training or do you actually have to have a ?NAV? radio that?s actually receiving a radio signal when performing those maneuvers?
 
Thanks for the reply Bill. So the question is, with the GPS knowing where the VOR is, can you “simulate” the VOR navigation/approaches that’s required for IFR training or do you actually have to have a “NAV” radio that’s actually receiving a radio signal when performing those maneuvers?

You need a Nav radio. You can't legally fly a VOR, LOC or ILS without one. On a VOR approach you can use the IFR GPS for course guidance up until the FAF beyond which you have to switch to the VOR as the NAV source. Trying to simulate it the entire way would only develop bad habits IMO.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Todd....very interesting. So, once again, does this also hold true during your “training” or more the fact of actual real-world usage when you’re flying a VOR, LOC or ILS approach? Once again I’m only trying to determine as to what equipment is going to be required by an instructor and or DPE, not so much as what’ll be required to fly a VOR, LOC or ILS approach in a real-world environment. If an actual NAV radio is going to be required during my “training and check-ride”, then it’s looking like I may be forced to install equipment such as a GTN 650 in my airplane to be able use it during my IFR training....but I’d sure like to only install the 625.
 
Last edited:
You need a Nav radio. You can't legally fly a VOR, LOC or ILS without one. On a VOR approach you can use the IFR GPS for course guidance up until the FAF beyond which you have to switch to the VOR as the NAV source. Trying to simulate it the entire way would only develop bad habits IMO.

Not completely true.. you can fly a vor with a waas gps as guidance as long as the underlying navaid is functional and is being monitored. However still true for a loc or ils. I have a gtn625 and a val nav radio. Ill be pulling the nav radio for my checkride which will limit me to using gps only. Makes for an easier check ride as the 625 does everything for you. Playing the system? Maybe, but it's legal.
 
Last edited:
Not completely true.. you can fly a vor with a waas gps as guidance as long as the underlying navaid is functional and is being monitored. However still true for a loc or ils. I have a gtn625 and a val nav radio. Ill be pulling the nav radio for my checkride which will limit me to using gps only. Makes for an easier check ride as the 625 does everything for you. Playing the system? Maybe, but it's legal.

Very good information...thanks! That?s exactly what information that I?m trying to know so that I can equip my panel with ?whatever? equipment will be needed for training/check-ride. If it?s ?playing the system?....so be it.
 
Not completely true.. you can fly a vor with a waas gps as guidance as long as the underlying navaid is functional and is being monitored. However still true for a loc or ils. I have a gtn625 and a val nav radio. Ill be pulling the nav radio for my checkride which will limit me to using gps only. Makes for an easier check ride as the 625 does everything for you. Playing the system? Maybe, but it's legal.

Might want to rethink that. Do you have the ref where you can use GPS for primary course guidance from the FAF to the MAP on a VOR approach? The GTN will give you a banner on approach activation that states it is prohibited to use the GPS in that fashion. I agree it can be used for increased SA, but IMO legally the primary CDI/HSI has to be in VLOC mode and if coupled the AP receiving VOR course guidance.
 
Last edited:
Either way all that is required for ifr is a waas gps. Ill put the nav radio back in after the checkride in case it ever becomes necessary for backup to the backup.
 
I stand corrected on the course guidance prohibition, but don't you still need the Nav radio and 2 CDIs to do it?
 
You would, which is why I said not entirely true. This info still seems slow to get out but the faa is making strides to keep up with technology. You could also just have 1 vor receiver and be legal for ifr and a check ride. You just have to be able to use the equipment that is in your aircraft. I just want to use the gps as it makes everything easier. It sets up your holds and flys the autopilot coupled. Easy peasy
 
You would, which is why I said not entirely true. This info still seems slow to get out but the faa is making strides to keep up with technology. You could also just have 1 vor receiver and be legal for ifr and a check ride. You just have to be able to use the equipment that is in your aircraft. I just want to use the gps as it makes everything easier. It sets up your holds and flys the autopilot coupled. Easy peasy

Gotcha. Based upon our discussion, I now vaguely recall this change but as I only have an HSI and no second CDI (not counting the GTN's builtin one), I can't use the rule change and have to rely on the previous method of switching to the VOR prior to crossing the FAF for final segment guidance. Hence the reason for my original reply.
 
Careful. Yes, the newer rule says you can use a certified gps for a VOR or NDB approach, as long as you can monitor that VOR or NDB and see its CDI/bearing pointer. BUT on a checkride, the DPE has the right to ?fail? the gps, and ask for a VOR approach using the nav receiver. You need to be able to use it.
You need to read the front section of the new ACS, where it states what airplane and what equipment you must furnish. The old PTS was clear, you needed a VOR. You and the examiner need to agree on what the ACS says.
 
Gotcha. Based upon our discussion, I now vaguely recall this change but as I only have an HSI and no second CDI (not counting the GTN's builtin one), I can't use the rule change and have to rely on the previous method of switching to the VOR prior to crossing the FAF for final segment guidance. Hence the reason for my original reply.

Not sure of your equipment, but on my GRT EFIS the HSI can display the GPS deviation while also showing the vor as an RMI pointer.
 
Not sure of your equipment, but on my GRT EFIS the HSI can display the GPS deviation while also showing the vor as an RMI pointer.

I have 2 bearing pointers that can be slaved to any of my nav sources, but I'm not sure for a VOR approach that's a suitable sub for a CDI in the context of monitoring the underlying NAVAID during the approach.

Thoughts?
 
GTN 625

I went through the same process as Mark33 is now going through. I didn't want to put in a 650 due to cost and installation. I was getting conflicting info. I knew it was legal to fly IFR without a VOR but could i get a checkride in my plane if I only had the WAAS GPS? So before I did any update work to my panel, I called the examiner who would do my checkride and ask him if he would not only do my checkride in my RV but could we do it if I had no VOR. He said as long as I could show him that i could do a precision approach then it would be fine. So my plane has no panel mounted VOR but I do have a sporty's portable mounted on a ball mount, hooked to ship's power with battery backup. Here is a picture: https://www.dropbox.com/s/fruqtgw4accueu0/New Panel.JPG?dl=0
 
FAA legal term?

So, the ACS (nee PTS) says the furnished aircraft must be capable of doing at least 2 non-precision approaches using different navaids.
What does that mean?
Is gps a navaid, so a second approach must not use gps?
Or is LNAV a ?navaid?, and is LPV a second ?navaid??
At least the ACS is clear on the required precision approach: either an ILS or an LPV with DA below 300? agl is acceptable.
 
I went through the same process as Mark33 is now going through. I didn't want to put in a 650 due to cost and installation. I was getting conflicting info. I knew it was legal to fly IFR without a VOR but could i get a checkride in my plane if I only had the WAAS GPS? So before I did any update work to my panel, I called the examiner who would do my checkride and ask him if he would not only do my checkride in my RV but could we do it if I had no VOR. He said as long as I could show him that i could do a precision approach then it would be fine. So my plane has no panel mounted VOR but I do have a sporty's portable mounted on a ball mount, hooked to ship's power with battery backup. Here is a picture: https://www.dropbox.com/s/fruqtgw4accueu0/New Panel.JPG?dl=0

That?s great that he was willing to work with you. I talked to an instructor today and he said that due to the fact that avionics are changing so quickly that both he and the examiner has to get somewhat creative when working with someone that wants to both train in their own airplane and take their check-ride in it. He said that as long as my airplane was equipped with a WAAS GPS that he was sure that we?d be able to use it for both training and check-out.
 
I guess I don't understand the desire to use only GPS for training and the checkride. IFR equipment is not the place to get cheap IMO. Although 99% of the time I fly IFR only using GPS as the Nav source, I like having more options in the form of VOR/GS/LOC capability--when in IMC options are good and I'm glad I learned how to use all of them in training.

FWIW, I've been on a GPS approach expecting an LPV annunciation and only got LNAV. I've also launched into an area NOTAM'd with GPS degradation on a few occasions. No way I'd have done that without an alternate means of navigation (I have a GTN 650 and SL 30).
 
I guess I don't understand the desire to use only GPS for training and the checkride. IFR equipment is not the place to get cheap IMO. Although 99% of the time I fly IFR only using GPS as the Nav source, I like having more options in the form of VOR/GS/LOC capability--when in IMC options are good and I'm glad I learned how to use all of them in training.

FWIW, I've been on a GPS approach expecting an LPV annunciation and only got LNAV. I've also launched into an area NOTAM'd with GPS degradation on a few occasions. No way I'd have done that without an alternate means of navigation (I have a GTN 650 and SL 30).

All good points, and I totally understand those points, but the two things that I have to keep in mind regarding which equipment to install in my airplane is 1. budge and 2. how often I?ll actually be flying in IMC conditions. I know that a lot of people like yourself file IFR pretty much every time they fly but I really can?t envision myself doing that....but I could be wrong and maybe once I get my ticket I may want to do it all the time as well. However, if I can complete my training and check-ride with GPS based equipment, then I think I?ll go that route for now.
 
All good points, and I totally understand those points, but the two things that I have to keep in mind regarding which equipment to install in my airplane is 1. budget and 2. how often I?ll actually be flying in IMC conditions. .

How often is not relevant, if the unexpected happens to happen to you when you're IMC.
Obviously, no one can be equipped for every conceivable failure. But to what degree you have backups (EFIS failure? GPS failure? Pitot tube failure? alternator failure?..... the list goes on) is a very real, but subjective, judgement call. Personally, as a CFII, I would decline to fly in IMC in your airplane, equipped as proposed. But it's your call to make, for yourself and any passengers.
 
I gave a lot of thought to my panel design - particularly the backups available in case xxx equipment failed. I actually ran a spreadsheet to show single points of failure and methods to work around those failure points.

For example, I have my Nav and GPS in one box (IFD440 NAV/Comm/GPS). My backup if the box goes dark is my Dynon GPS, which has it's own separate WAAS GPS antenna, and Dynon Comm radio. My aircraft electrical bus is backed up by battery backups on the EFIS.

My worst case scenario is a failure of my ADHRS. I only have one, and I could install another (and probably will), but for now, if my ADHRS fails, I have a Stratus II and Foreflight, which provides GPS based attitude, altitude, and speed.
 
3 ADHRS

Scott, I've always heard you've gotta have 3 ADHRS. If you have 2, and one fails, which one is it? With 3, you have a "tie breaker"
 
Scott, I've always heard you've gotta have 3 ADHRS. If you have 2, and one fails, which one is it? With 3, you have a "tie breaker"

I think there's a huge "fine line" between the basic Cessna 152 six-pack with vacuum/electric gauges on one side of the "line", and a Boeing 777 with glass panels, multiple EFIS, multiple ADHRS, multiple NAV radios, etc. Most of us are striking a balance somewhere in between.

In an ideal world, I would install that second Dynon ADHRS in my RV. Then I would have two ADHRS installed plus the Stratus II/Foreflight ADHRS to break the tie.

Even without the third ADHRS, my RV is better equipped than 90% of the General Aviation IFR fleet out there.
 
I gave a lot of thought to my panel design - particularly the backups available in case xxx equipment failed. I actually ran a spreadsheet to show single points of failure and methods to work around those failure points.

Scott,

Care to share that spreadsheet? I'm planning a panel and avionics equipment, and would appreciate seeing how you put it together.

Thanks!
 
IFR Trainer

Hello Scott,

Thanks for your post. It answered some questions I had in purchasing an RV-10 and using it for IFR training. For the same reasons you list, learning on a plane and instruments you know, while saving some money in using your plane for the training. I just began shopping around for an already built plane that would be up to the task while searching for a CFI at the Oakland County International Airport in Michigan.

Best of luck,

Ted Hand
 
This is all very timely for me. I started my instrument training in Sept and it was put on hold due to my 300xl dying. I'm in the middle of an extensive rework of the panel with an ifd440 becoming my ifr GPS. It's a long slog.

In the process of thinking about equipment I recalled several local folks who fly down to Southern California reasonably regularly talking about remarkably frequent GPS outages, where there is essentially no GPS signal for significant amounts of time. The theory is that there is GPS signal jamming going on at one of several military installations in the region and one or more of those facilities is actually developing and testing jamming technology. The point being that my sense of warm and fuzzy surrounding the reliability of GPS got a bit of a reality check and the importance of ground based navigation was reinforced.

I'm still working on the panel installation and rat's nest of wiring, but I think I am firmly in the "putting it back together" phase, rather than the "taking it apart" phase!
 
This is all very timely for me. I started my instrument training in Sept and it was put on hold due to my 300xl dying. I'm in the middle of an extensive rework of the panel with an ifd440 becoming my ifr GPS. It's a long slog.

In the process of thinking about equipment I recalled several local folks who fly down to Southern California reasonably regularly talking about remarkably frequent GPS outages, where there is essentially no GPS signal for significant amounts of time. The theory is that there is GPS signal jamming going on at one of several military installations in the region and one or more of those facilities is actually developing and testing jamming technology. The point being that my sense of warm and fuzzy surrounding the reliability of GPS got a bit of a reality check and the importance of ground based navigation was reinforced.

I'm still working on the panel installation and rat's nest of wiring, but I think I am firmly in the "putting it back together" phase, rather than the "taking it apart" phase!

Those GPS outages are NOTAM?d and mapped 72 hours in advance, so it shouldn?t be a surprise to them when it happens. The maps are available here: https://www.faasafety.gov/SPANS/notices_public.aspx
 
Pertinent to me for this thread to pop back up again - I'm taking my IFR written later this week and starting my flight work next week. I didn't have any trouble at all getting a CFII to agree to teach me in my 9A, the first three I asked all said yes, though one wanted to see my panel first.
 
Those GPS outages are NOTAM?d and mapped 72 hours in advance, so it shouldn?t be a surprise to them when it happens. The maps are available here: https://www.faasafety.gov/SPANS/notices_public.aspx

Only the known or planned ones.
This teaser article from one of the trade mags was put out yesterday.

I remember an article a few years ago about how they were constantly having problems with the GPS signal around Newark. Long story short, they found a truck driver, who's route passed near the airport frequently, had a jammer in his truck so his company couldn't keep tabs on him.
 
Back
Top