IFR with a VFR GPS

Probably because it's unnecessary. If you want direct just file direct.

Out West direct for the entire flight is not usually possible with
non-turbo aircraft. What usually happens is when you get half way in
the middle of no-where on an airway, the controller will send you
direct to some intersection because he knows you are now far enough way
to avoid the mountain rather than have to continue to fly down the
airway until you get to the next intersection. Besides, I can't
remember the last time I was actually given the route I filed. I've
tried to second guess the routes in the Bay Area and L.A (even the
central valley) but they seem to change on a daily basis (probably
depending on which way each airport is landing jets). When flying into
SoCal you usually get an "updated" routing about 1/2 way down. That
routing is usually longer than the amount of space you have on your
flight plan (bring extra paper to write it all down).
-Robret

Jeff,

This isssue has been addressed in IFR Magazine a number of times. In a
nutshell, you cannot use the VFR GPS as a "primary" navaid. However,
you can go dead reckoning if you wish when IFR. So, if you want to put
something in remarks, that's fine. Once enroute, if you want to go
direct, ask for a radar vector of ___ degrees, direct to ____. You are
then cleared via radar vector (all of it has to be in a radar
environment) and you are using the GPS as a backup, which is perfectly
legal. The controller gets a benefit because you suggest the heading
and you get off of his or her screen faster because you are going
direct.

For filing it doesn't hurt to file radar vectors to your destination
and note the VFR GPS in remarks.

Check out back issues of IFR Magazine for a fuller discussion. Also
check AVweb as I recall that one of John Deakin's columns addressed
this matter.

All the best,
Rick

I"m not sure why the "radar vectors" are required since the controller
doesn't need to read you a heading. Just ask for direct to foobar, if
you get it, fly direct foobar. If the FAA asks you how you navigated
there just tell them you were taking star shots like a pirate, it
really doesn't make a difference. There are lots of stories of military
and commercial pilots (not even too far back) that would fly direct in
IMC just using a wizwheel. Nothing prevents that today.

-Robert

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ps.com...

Out West direct for the entire flight is not usually possible with
non-turbo aircraft.


So what would be the purpose of putting "VFR GPS" in the remarks section for
such flights?



What usually happens is when you get half way in
the middle of no-where on an airway, the controller will send you
direct to some intersection because he knows you are now far enough way
to avoid the mountain rather than have to continue to fly down the
airway until you get to the next intersection.


So why don't you file that?



Besides, I can't
remember the last time I was actually given the route I filed. I've
tried to second guess the routes in the Bay Area and L.A (even the
central valley) but they seem to change on a daily basis (probably
depending on which way each airport is landing jets). When flying into
SoCal you usually get an "updated" routing about 1/2 way down. That
routing is usually longer than the amount of space you have on your
flight plan (bring extra paper to write it all down).


So what effect would putting "VFR GPS" in the remarks section have on that?

wrote in message
oups.com...

This isssue has been addressed in IFR Magazine a number of times. In a
nutshell, you cannot use the VFR GPS as a "primary" navaid. However,
you can go dead reckoning if you wish when IFR. So, if you want to put
something in remarks, that's fine. Once enroute, if you want to go
direct, ask for a radar vector of ___ degrees, direct to ____. You are
then cleared via radar vector (all of it has to be in a radar
environment) and you are using the GPS as a backup, which is perfectly
legal. The controller gets a benefit because you suggest the heading
and you get off of his or her screen faster because you are going
direct.

For filing it doesn't hurt to file radar vectors to your destination
and note the VFR GPS in remarks.


You don't have to play any games with "radar vectors" nor do you have to put
anything in remarks. If you want to go direct then just file direct. It
doesn't matter what you're using for navigation, just be able to fly what
you file.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ps.com...

I"m not sure why the "radar vectors" are required since the controller
doesn't need to read you a heading.


"Radar vectors" isn't required.



Just ask for direct to foobar, if
you get it, fly direct foobar. If the FAA asks you how you navigated
there just tell them you were taking star shots like a pirate, it
really doesn't make a difference.


You could just tell them you used a handheld GPS.



There are lots of stories of military
and commercial pilots (not even too far back) that would fly direct in
IMC just using a wizwheel. Nothing prevents that today.


Exactly.

On 11/11/05 1:16 PM, in article
,
" wrote:

Jeff,

This isssue has been addressed in IFR Magazine a number of times. In a
nutshell, you cannot use the VFR GPS as a "primary" navaid. However,
you can go dead reckoning if you wish when IFR. So, if you want to put
something in remarks, that's fine. Once enroute, if you want to go
direct, ask for a radar vector of ___ degrees, direct to ____. You are
then cleared via radar vector (all of it has to be in a radar
environment) and you are using the GPS as a backup, which is perfectly
legal. The controller gets a benefit because you suggest the heading
and you get off of his or her screen faster because you are going
direct.

For filing it doesn't hurt to file radar vectors to your destination
and note the VFR GPS in remarks.

Check out back issues of IFR Magazine for a fuller discussion. Also
check AVweb as I recall that one of John Deakin's columns addressed
this matter.

All the best,
Rick


Thanks for the recommendation, but I think the discussion in
rec.aviation.ifr is quite enough. I hadn't intended to start such a long
thread, I just wanted a few real-world experiences.

In anticipation of not using GPS as my primary nav, I've been boning up on
my VOR nav skills and the NDB approaches with X-Plane since the Arrow I've
been flying doesn't have an ADF to play with. Especially since the NDB is
the only option open into 47A (Canton, GA) without an IFR GPS. An ILS is
scheduled, but that's a few years until it becomes reality.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino

Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com

More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

" wrote:

Jeff,

This isssue has been addressed in IFR Magazine a number of times. In a
nutshell, you cannot use the VFR GPS as a "primary" navaid. However,
you can go dead reckoning if you wish when IFR. So, if you want to put
something in remarks, that's fine. Once enroute, if you want to go
direct, ask for a radar vector of ___ degrees, direct to ____. You are
then cleared via radar vector (all of it has to be in a radar
environment) and you are using the GPS as a backup, which is perfectly
legal. The controller gets a benefit because you suggest the heading
and you get off of his or her screen faster because you are going
direct.

For filing it doesn't hurt to file radar vectors to your destination
and note the VFR GPS in remarks.

Check out back issues of IFR Magazine for a fuller discussion. Also
check AVweb as I recall that one of John Deakin's columns addressed
this matter.

That'd be http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182076-1.html

I"m not sure why the "radar vectors" are required since the controller
doesn't need to read you a heading.

"Radar vectors" isn't required.

I thought that was what I was saying. Maybe I wasn't clear. I was
referring to the previous poster's comments of asking for "radar
vectors" and stating that you can come up with your own heading, you
don't need ATC to give you one.

So what would be the purpose of putting "VFR GPS" in the remarks section for
such flights?

I usually start out filing mostly direct (other than through the passes
and mountains). ATC always says no and gives a bunch of airways
depending on where all the jet arrivals are. Having "VFR GPS" seems to
help in that the controllers will often offer me ad-hoc "short cuts" in
the airway routing when there are holes in the arrivals.

-Robert