Does a dual check of the VORs for use in instrument flight only count if it
has been done while in flight? Or if you do it on the ground (document it)
is that meet the FARs?

We had a fairly heated hanger discussion about this and I would like to hear
some more opinions.

Scott

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott F. Migaldi, K9PO
MI-150972
PP-ASEL-IA

Are you a PADI Instructor or DM? Then join the PADI
Instructor Yahoo Group at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PADI-Instructors/join
-----------------------------------
Catch the wave!
www.hamwave.com


"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we.
They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country
and our people, and neither do we." - George W. Bush

-------------------------------------

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 12:29:50 -0500, "SFM" > wrote:

>Does a dual check of the VORs for use in instrument flight only count if it
>has been done while in flight? Or if you do it on the ground (document it)
>is that meet the FARs?
>
>We had a fairly heated hanger discussion about this and I would like to hear
>some more opinions.

Well, my opinion is worth exactly what you pay for it :-) and my opinion
is that the checking of one VOR against another does not need to be done in
the air. It can be done in the air or on the ground.

It seems to me that if you are checking your VOR's per 91.171(c) (the dual
VOR check), there is nothing in that paragraph that says the check must be
done in the air; and it does state that if you are using that procedure, it
is *in place of* the procedures in paragraph (b). Therefore it seems to me
that paragraph (c) supersedes (b).

=================================
§ 91.171 VOR equipment check for IFR operations.

(c) If dual system VOR (units independent of each other except for the
antenna) is installed in the aircraft, the person checking the equipment
may check one system against the other in place of the check procedures
specified in paragraph (b) of this section. Both systems shall be tuned to
the same VOR ground facility and note the indicated bearings to that
station. The maximum permissible variation between the two indicated
bearings is 4 degrees.
=================================


--ron

SFM wrote:
> Does a dual check of the VORs for use in instrument flight only count if it
> has been done while in flight? Or if you do it on the ground (document it)
> is that meet the FARs?
>
> We had a fairly heated hanger discussion about this and I would like to hear
> some more opinions.
>
How do the airborne advocates read "while airborne" into the regulation?
The implicit requirement is that the station be received with a good
ident and no waving off flag. Granted, that would usually require you
be airborne, but certainly not always.

In article t>,
wrote:

> SFM wrote:
> > Does a dual check of the VORs for use in instrument flight only count if it
> > has been done while in flight? Or if you do it on the ground (document it)
> > is that meet the FARs?
> >
> > We had a fairly heated hanger discussion about this and I would like to hear
> > some more opinions.
> >
> How do the airborne advocates read "while airborne" into the regulation?
> The implicit requirement is that the station be received with a good
> ident and no waving off flag. Granted, that would usually require you
> be airborne, but certainly not always.

I can just see it now, "Look, both CDI's read the same. Needle is
centered and they both say NAV. Let's log it as checked and we're good
to go".

There is nothing in the regs that say a dual VOR check has to be done in
the air. If you can get a valid signal on the ground, why should there
be any restriction. I do this all the time. (Get LEB VOR from KCNH)

SFM wrote:
> Does a dual check of the VORs for use in instrument flight only count if it
> has been done while in flight? Or if you do it on the ground (document it)
> is that meet the FARs?
>
> We had a fairly heated hanger discussion about this and I would like to hear
> some more opinions.
>
> Scott
>


--
Remove "2PLANES" to reply.

The in flight controversy comes from section 4 of 91.171 which is
highlighted below. The only time the Dual Check is mentioned it is preceded
by 'While in flight'

My question is then if that is the case then how does one check their VORs
when at an airport that does not have VOT or FAA approved VOR Check and
depart legal IFR?

I think the reg is being read wrong by those in flight advocates and section
(c) is not subordinate to paragraph 4 but stands on its own.

Scott
§ 91.171 VOR equipment check for IFR operations.
top
(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft under IFR using the VOR system of
radio navigation unless the VOR equipment of that aircraft-

(1) Is maintained, checked, and inspected under an approved procedure; or

(2) Has been operationally checked within the preceding 30 days, and was
found to be within the limits of the permissible indicated bearing error set
forth in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section.

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, each person
conducting a VOR check under paragraph (a)(2) of this section shall-

(1) Use, at the airport of intended departure, an FAA-operated or approved
test signal or a test signal radiated by a certificated and appropriately
rated radio repair station or, outside the United States, a test signal
operated or approved by an appropriate authority to check the VOR equipment
(the maximum permissible indicated bearing error is plus or minus 4
degrees); or

(2) Use, at the airport of intended departure, a point on the airport
surface designated as a VOR system checkpoint by the Administrator, or,
outside the United States, by an appropriate authority (the maximum
permissible bearing error is plus or minus 4 degrees);

(3) If neither a test signal nor a designated checkpoint on the surface is
available, use an airborne checkpoint designated by the Administrator or,
outside the United States, by an appropriate authority (the maximum
permissible bearing error is plus or minus 6 degrees); or

(4) If no check signal or point is available, while in flight-

------------------------------------------^^^^^^^^^^

(i) Select a VOR radial that lies along the centerline of an established VOR
airway;

(ii) Select a prominent ground point along the selected radial preferably
more than 20 nautical miles from the VOR ground facility and maneuver the
aircraft directly over the point at a reasonably low altitude; and

(iii) Note the VOR bearing indicated by the receiver when over the ground
point (the maximum permissible variation between the published radial and
the indicated bearing is 6 degrees).

(c) If dual system VOR (units independent of each other except for the
antenna) is installed in the aircraft, the person checking the equipment may
check one system against the other in place of the check procedures
specified in paragraph (b) of this section. Both systems shall be tuned to
the same VOR ground facility and note the indicated bearings to that
station. The maximum permissible variation between the two indicated
bearings is 4 degrees.

(d) Each person making the VOR operational check, as specified in paragraph
(b) or (c) of this section, shall enter the date, place, bearing error, and
sign the aircraft log or other record. In addition, if a test signal
radiated by a repair station, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section, is used, an entry must be made in the aircraft log or other record
by the repair station certificate holder or the certificate holder's
representative certifying to the bearing transmitted by the repair station
for the check and the date of transmission.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number
2120-0005)

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott F. Migaldi, K9PO
MI-150972
PP-ASEL-IA

Are you a PADI Instructor or DM? Then join the PADI
Instructor Yahoo Group at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PADI-Instructors/join
-----------------------------------
Catch the wave!
www.hamwave.com


"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we.
They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country
and our people, and neither do we." - George W. Bush

-------------------------------------
> wrote in message
nk.net...
>
>
> SFM wrote:
> > Does a dual check of the VORs for use in instrument flight only count if
it
> > has been done while in flight? Or if you do it on the ground (document
it)
> > is that meet the FARs?
> >
> > We had a fairly heated hanger discussion about this and I would like to
hear
> > some more opinions.
> >
> How do the airborne advocates read "while airborne" into the regulation?
> The implicit requirement is that the station be received with a good
> ident and no waving off flag. Granted, that would usually require you
> be airborne, but certainly not always.
>

In article >, "SFM" >
wrote:

> The in flight controversy comes from section 4 of 91.171 which is
> highlighted below. The only time the Dual Check is mentioned it is preceded
> by 'While in flight'

No it isn't. The "while in flight" is in paragraph (b). The dual VOR
check is described in paragraph (c).

> My question is then if that is the case then how does one check their VORs
> when at an airport that does not have VOT or FAA approved VOR Check and
> depart legal IFR?

If you are out of VOR currency, and there's no VOT or approved check
point, and you can't get a valid signal to do a dual VOR check (and
there's no radio shop on the field who could do the check for you), the
answer is simple (if somewhat inconvenient): you cannot depart IFR on a
flight which requires the use of your VOR receiver.

It no different than if you let your annual lapse, or your pitot static
check, or any of a number of time-limited certifications for either
yourself or the aircraft.

> I think the reg is being read wrong by those in flight advocates and section
> (c) is not subordinate to paragraph 4 but stands on its own.

Exactly. It's parallel to paragraph (b). There really should be some
questions on the private pilot written about how to parse the text of
federal regulations :-)

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message ...

> Exactly. It's parallel to paragraph (b). There really should be some
> questions on the private pilot written about how to parse the text of
> federal regulations :-)

Yeah, it's also the abysmal typography of many of the FAR publishers. If
they indented the paragraphs, it would be clearer.

My question with this rule has always been the part of (b)(1) that says
"airport of intended departure." I've never been sure whether the
inclusion of the word "intended" was to preclude unintentional departures
from the rule, or to keep you from calibrating your VOR and then departing
from some other airport.

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 07:32:41 -0500, "SFM" > wrote:

> The in flight controversy comes from section 4 of 91.171 which is
>highlighted below. The only time the Dual Check is mentioned it is preceded
>by 'While in flight'

Yeah but that "while in flight" is in a different paragraph than the dual
VOR check. And it is in the paragraph that the dual VOR check is
specifically in place of.

Para (b)
1
2
3
4
Para (c)


--ron

Dan Truesdell > wrote in
:

> There is nothing in the regs that say a dual VOR check has to be done
> in the air. If you can get a valid signal on the ground, why should
> there be any restriction. I do this all the time. (Get LEB VOR from
> KCNH)

Oh, well then it must be OK if YOU do it all the time!

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message >...
>
> Yeah, it's also the abysmal typography of many of the FAR publishers. If
> they indented the paragraphs, it would be clearer.
>
*** I think if they indented the FARs, the books would have to be really wide.

- Jerry Kaidor ( )

"Jerry Kaidor" > wrote in message om...
> "Ron Natalie" > wrote in message >...
> >
> > Yeah, it's also the abysmal typography of many of the FAR publishers. If
> > they indented the paragraphs, it would be clearer.
> >
> *** I think if they indented the FARs, the books would have to be really wide.
>
Not really. There's rarely more than two levels underneath the section.
The maximum I know of is 4, and even that's not unwieldy. Federal
rules limit it to six divisions (a)(1)(i)(A)(1)(italic-i). I've had FAR books typeset
with indent before. A normal pilot's Part 1/61/91 set isn't much bigger done
nicely (with an index even). My Summit CD's are also indented
that way.

I've just finished watching Volume 7 of Sportys Instrument Rating DVD course
and in it they covered VOR test requirments and said that the dual VOR check
could be done either in the air or on the ground.

Derek...


"Ron Rosenfeld" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 07:32:41 -0500, "SFM" > wrote:
>
>> The in flight controversy comes from section 4 of 91.171 which is
>>highlighted below. The only time the Dual Check is mentioned it is
>>preceded
>>by 'While in flight'
>
> Yeah but that "while in flight" is in a different paragraph than the dual
> VOR check. And it is in the paragraph that the dual VOR check is
> specifically in place of.
>
> Para (b)
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> Para (c)
>
>
> --ron

SFM wrote:

> Does a dual check of the VORs for use in instrument flight only count if it
> has been done while in flight? Or if you do it on the ground (document it)
> is that meet the FARs?
>
> We had a fairly heated hanger discussion about this and I would like to hear
> some more opinions.
>
> Scott
>

I do mine on the ground typically. I don't know of any requirement in
the FAR that it be an airborne check when comparing VOR to VOR.

Matt