Best non certified GPS for flying IFR

[kauaibobby]

I am looking for other peoples reviews and opinions who have flown with different GPS.
Garmin, bendix king, anywhere, avmap, i pad.
I am looking for something with something bigger than a 4 or 5 inch screen.
I just tried the I FLY 700 and couldnt see the screen, not enough back light on screen.
Anyone's experience with there gps would be great.
thankyou and keep this great forum going

[Vern]

VFR & IFR charts, IFR approach plates, xm wx, AOPA airport directory, taxi diagrams, bright screen, backup instrument module, etc. See the Garmin website.

[L.Adamson]

I vote for the Garmin 696 too. It's bright under all circumstances.

L.Adamson --- RV6A

[the_other_dougreeves]

+1 for the G696

TODR

[N941WR]

Funny, but I thought you couldn't use a "non certified GPS for flying IFR", meaning you can't file "/G" unless you have a IFR certified GPS in the plane.

However, you can a "non certifed" (handheld) GPS for situational awareness.

[Sig600]

You just can't use it as "sole means" of navigation. i.e. you can use it for your primary means of navigation as long as you have a VOR/NDB or some other means of navigation to back it up.

[Jack Tyler]

Sig & the group:

Can anyone offer us a cite in the FARs which clarifies this? As it happens, I've been reading old threads here this past week, trying to clarify exactly this point. One main theme of the threads was that the FARs are slow to catch up with technology in the cockpit. But as for a definitive answer on what GPS gear an Experimental can use to file IFR /G, the opinions varied and no FAR cite was offered up (in the threads I've seen). That info would be most welcome & thanks!

Jack

[rleffler]

Originally Posted by Jack Tyler

Sig & the group:

Can anyone offer us a cite in the FARs which clarifies this? As it happens, I've been reading old threads here this past week, trying to clarify exactly this point. One main theme of the threads was that the FARs are slow to catch up with technology in the cockpit. But as for a definitive answer on what GPS gear an Experimental can use to file IFR /G, the opinions varied and no FAR cite was offered up (in the threads I've seen). That info would be most welcome & thanks!

Jack

I think the gotcha is that since all the GPS vendors state which products are and aren't compliant with the various TSOs, your insurance company may use it as a way to avoid a claim if you filed IFR with a /G. I think the more practical approach is to file with whatever suffix you actually meet, then place the comment "VFR GPS" in the comment section. That will let the controller know what you are capable of doing.

EAA FAQ on GPS:

Global Positioning System (GPS) is becoming a very popular navigation tool for both VFR and IFR flight operations. Many aircraft, including homebuilts, now sport GPS equipment in their instrument panel. Some of these units are approved for IFR operations, and the FAA has recently updated their guidance on how to approve the installation of GPS equipment in individual aircraft.

This guidance comes in the form of FAA Advisory Circular 20-138A, titled ?Airworthiness Approval of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) Equipment?. The purpose of this AC is stated as providing ?guidance material for the airworthiness approval of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) equipment. Like all AC material, this AC is not mandatory and does not constitute a regulation. It is issued for guidance purposes and to outline a method of compliance with the rules. In lieu of following this method without deviation, the applicant may elect to follow an alternate method, provided the alternate method is also found by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to be an acceptable means of complying with the requirements of the federal aviation regulations (Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 14 CFR).?

The guidance contained in AC 20-138A is based on FAA regulations contained in parts 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 43, 91, 121, and 135. Of these regulations, only part 91 applies to homebuilt aircraft. However, the info in the AC is still a valuable tool for the builder who wishes to install a GPS unit, as it contains accuracy and testing criteria that can be used to verify that the installation meets the performance requirements acceptable to the FAA.

As with transponders and other equipment discussed previously, GPS equipment must meet the performance requirements of the applicable TSO (in this case, C129), but there is no specific requirement for the equipment to be built under a TSO authorization. However, if the equipment is not built under a TSO authorization, it is up to the owner/operator to verify and document that the equipment performs within the required specifications. It is also the owner or operator's responsibility to document the necessary flight-test data showing that the installation performs within the required accuracy parameters.

The bottom line;


All of this leads us to the conclusion that none of the equipment installed in a homebuilt aircraft is required to be built under a TSO authorization. But in most cases, it?s to the builder?s advantage to install ?TSO?ed? equipment if possible. Also, FAA guidance aimed toward type certificated aircraft can be used by the builder when installing equipment in a homebuilt, even though many of the regulations referenced in the FAA guidance do not directly apply to the homebuilt aircraft.

[pierre smith]

...legally. However, if you fly with a portable GPS, like a 396/496/696 (yes, the 696 falls under portable) for navigational use, that's fine. At the arrival end of your trip, you can't legally do a GPS approach with any of those GPS units because they don't have what's called RAIM...Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring...basically, a built in accuracy checking system, such as in the Garmin 430W.

You can, however, do an ILS approach if the airport has one, using a VOR/ILS receiver. The caveat now, is that there are so many smaller airports that ONLY have a GPS approach, that without a TSO'd GPS receiver aboard, you'd be SOL if that airport has IMC conditions....the reason I decided to bite the bullet and spring for a 430W and endure the pain.

Regards,

[Loboflyer]

Originally Posted by pierre smith

... any of those GPS units because they don't have what's called RAIM...

I believe RAIM is necessary, but not sufficient, for approach. From what I remember reading, the certification requirements go way beyond the hardware in the plane and even involve how the software source code is quality assured, the control of the database, and many other factors. I was looking into what it might take to make an FAA compliant USB GPS for add-on to EFISes. My head started spinning and I got a much greater appreciation for why we didn't have them yet in our panels.