ques about IFR "certification"

[john freeman]

please excuse my dumbness,but just what is "IFR certification" when
used in the context such as "What was the date of your last IFR
certification?"
if your aircraft has all required instruments and you have complied
with FAR 91.411 regarding static, transponder, and altimeter tests
within last 24 months; then what else is needed?
tia
john

[BTIZ]

that should do it..

unless perhaps your GPS data base may be out of date..

BT

"john freeman" > wrote in message
...
> please excuse my dumbness,but just what is "IFR certification" when
> used in the context such as "What was the date of your last IFR
> certification?"
> if your aircraft has all required instruments and you have complied
> with FAR 91.411 regarding static, transponder, and altimeter tests
> within last 24 months; then what else is needed?
> tia
> john

[Ross Oliver]

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 20:29:41 -0400, john freeman > wrote:
>please excuse my dumbness,but just what is "IFR certification" when
>used in the context such as "What was the date of your last IFR
>certification?"
>if your aircraft has all required instruments and you have complied
>with FAR 91.411 regarding static, transponder, and altimeter tests
>within last 24 months; then what else is needed?


30-day VOR check.

Perhaps "certification" is being incorrectly used to mean
"IFR currency", meaning the date you last completed your
required 6 actual or simulated approaches (and VOR intercept,
tracking and holding procedures), or instrument proficiency check?

[Ron Natalie]

"john freeman" > wrote in message ...
> please excuse my dumbness,but just what is "IFR certification" when
> used in the context such as "What was the date of your last IFR
> certification?"
> if your aircraft has all required instruments and you have complied
> with FAR 91.411 regarding static, transponder, and altimeter tests
> within last 24 months; then what else is needed?

Nothing.

The transponder/static/encoder checks is what people typically mean
with IFR "certification".

The real IFR certification happens when the type certificate is approved
and never expires :-).

[Bill Denton]

You can take a "no radio" aircraft and upgrade it to "full IFR capable". I
think this requires some sort of sign-off.

Conversely, you could remove all of the radios from an aircraft and it would
no longer meet IFR requirements. I imagine some sort of "decertification" is
necessary.

I doubt that the type certificate enters into it at all...



"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "john freeman" > wrote in message
...
> > please excuse my dumbness,but just what is "IFR certification" when
> > used in the context such as "What was the date of your last IFR
> > certification?"
> > if your aircraft has all required instruments and you have complied
> > with FAR 91.411 regarding static, transponder, and altimeter tests
> > within last 24 months; then what else is needed?
>
> Nothing.
>
> The transponder/static/encoder checks is what people typically mean
> with IFR "certification".
>
> The real IFR certification happens when the type certificate is approved
> and never expires :-).
>
>

[Ron Natalie]

"Bill Denton" > wrote in message ...
> You can take a "no radio" aircraft and upgrade it to "full IFR capable". I
> think this requires some sort of sign-off.

You certainly can provided the type certificate does not preclude it.

> Conversely, you could remove all of the radios from an aircraft and it would
> no longer meet IFR requirements. I imagine some sort of "decertification" is
> necessary.

Nonsense.

>
> I doubt that the type certificate enters into it at all...
>
The type certificate very much enters into it. If the type certificate says DAY VFR
only or lists specific equipment that is required for IFR flight, this is what you have
to do. If the type certificate doesn't have any such limitations, then only equipment
and inspection requirements in part 91 matter.

[Bob Moore]

"Bill Denton" wrote

> You can take a "no radio" aircraft and upgrade it to "full IFR
> capable". I think this requires some sort of sign-off.

Radio installation has nothing to do with the aircraft being
certificated for IFR operation on its original type certificate.
"No radio" IFR operation in uncontrolled airspace is completly
legal.

> I doubt that the type certificate enters into it at all...

The type certificate (or a supplement) is ALL that matters in
addition to the usual Part 91 transponder/static checks.

You will find that the POH or FM will list the approved types
of operation and for most production aircraft these include
DAY/NIGHT and VFR/IFR.

Bob Moore

[Ron Natalie]

"Bob Moore" > wrote in message
>
> You will find that the POH or FM will list the approved types
> of operation and for most production aircraft these include
> DAY/NIGHT and VFR/IFR.
>
Make that MAY list. Depending on when/how the aircraft is
certficated it may or may not spell out restrictions/requirements
for NIGHT and IFR flight.

[Robert M. Gary]

"Bill Denton" > wrote in message >...
> You can take a "no radio" aircraft and upgrade it to "full IFR capable". I
> think this requires some sort of sign-off.
>
> Conversely, you could remove all of the radios from an aircraft and it would
> no longer meet IFR requirements. I imagine some sort of "decertification" is
> necessary.
>
> I doubt that the type certificate enters into it at all...
>
The type certificate states whether the plane can be flown IFR. The
certification testing includes hitting it with lightening (in a secure
room) and seeing how the electrons move around the plane. This has
become a challenging thing for the new composite planes. Most every
plane that you will see sitting on the FBOs ramp has met this
requirement. Some planes certified by the old CAA may be graced
though.

There is no requirement to have radios to fly IFR.

-Robert

[Bill Denton]

Let's look at this last-to-first. You stated: "There is no requirement to
have radios to fly IFR." First of all, this statement is far too broad.
Which radios are you referring to? COM, NAV, ADF, ELT, LORAN, GPS, or
something else?

And that statement is just plain false! See FAR 91.205:
(d) Instrument flight rules. For IFR flight, the following instruments and
equipment are required:
(2) Two-way radio communications system and navigational equipment
appropriate to the ground facilities to be used.

That looks pretty clear to me: you DO have to have radios on board to fly
IFR.

On the next part of this post, you state: "The type certificate states
whether the plane can be flown IFR."

That is not correct. What the type certificate says is that the plane has
met ONE of the sets of criteria required for it to be used for IFR flight. A
plane cannot be flown IFR unless it has IFR on the type certificate, but
just because a plane has IFR on the type certificate doesn't mean it can be
flown IFR. The other requirements must also be met.

A brand new aircraft rolling out of the factory with IFR on the type
certificate but with no radios cannot be flown IFR...



"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
om...
> "Bill Denton" > wrote in message
>...
> > You can take a "no radio" aircraft and upgrade it to "full IFR capable".
I
> > think this requires some sort of sign-off.
> >
> > Conversely, you could remove all of the radios from an aircraft and it
would
> > no longer meet IFR requirements. I imagine some sort of
"decertification" is
> > necessary.
> >
> > I doubt that the type certificate enters into it at all...
> >
> The type certificate states whether the plane can be flown IFR. The
> certification testing includes hitting it with lightening (in a secure
> room) and seeing how the electrons move around the plane. This has
> become a challenging thing for the new composite planes. Most every
> plane that you will see sitting on the FBOs ramp has met this
> requirement. Some planes certified by the old CAA may be graced
> though.
>
> There is no requirement to have radios to fly IFR.
>
> -Robert

[Ron Natalie]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message om...


> The type certificate states whether the plane can be flown IFR. The
> certification testing includes hitting it with lightening (in a secure
> room) and seeing how the electrons move around the plane.

There is NO such requirement. The only requirement is that the design
accomodate certain lightning safety features. On metal aircraft this is
accomplished just by making sure things are bonded together and watching
out for certain key pieces like fuel caps.

For composites, it means either building a coductive shield around the
important aircraft components or by other means.

While manufacturers and NASA have used testing procedures to evaluate
designs, it's NOT a certification requirement.

> There is no requirement to have radios to fly IFR.

Other than 91.205(d)(2) that requires 2-way communcations and navigational equipment
appropriate to the facilites to be used. Unless you're going to make very short flights in
uncontrolled airspace you're going to need at least comms.