Setting altimeters with no radio

Neil Gould writes:

When we speak of GPS _usage_ in aviation, we are specifically and almost
exclusively talking about receivers.

I'm not sure who "we" are, but GPS is a navigation system, not just a
receiver.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

When we speak of GPS _usage_ in aviation, we are specifically and
almost exclusively talking about receivers.

I'm not sure who "we" are, but GPS is a navigation system, not just a
receiver.

Considering where you are posting this, it should be clear that "we"
refers to "pilots of real aircraft". Even if you couldn't have figured
that one out on your own from the snippet that you responded to, it should
have been obvious from the rest of the paragraph that you chose to snip.
To make it plainly clear, VORs, NDBs, Loran, et al are also "navigation
systems", but the only components that pilots typically work with are the
receivers, just as for GPS.

Neil

"karl gruber" wrote in message
...

Your belief is wrong. Could be DEAD wrong. Read MX's posts...........he
can give you an education on this subject.

Karl

It's entirely possible he could give me an education on this subject, but
I'd rather go to a reliable source.

But it would be kind of weird to be above 10K where a Mode-C transponder is
required, but not have a radio or altimeter...

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"TxSrv" wrote in message
. ..

That Reg does not apply to flight within 3,000 above the surface. You
have to look at two other Regs to conclude that. Therefore, under 3,000,
an adjustable altimeter is not required per 91.205. FARs don't apply to
you; stay away.


An altimeter adjustable for barometric pressure is not required for VFR
flight at any altitude.

If you're operating at any altitude below 18,000 feet and you're equipped
with a radio and you have an altimeter adjustable for barometric pressure
you must set it to the current reported altimeter setting of an
appropriate available station, VFR and IFR.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...


No, it is not. It's especially dangerous for RVSM flight, but it's so
inaccurate that it should never be used for anything,

Your complete misunderstanding of the GPS system is showing. I have two
GPS's in the plane, one panel mount and one portable. It is rare that
either one is ever off by more than 100 feet in altitude. Using GPS for
your altitude for VFR flight would be perfectly fine.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Neil Gould writes:


It's a part of my 295, and every Garmin aviation GPS newer than that.


Those are receivers, not the GPS. WAAS is completely independent of
GPS.



It's integral to the system. You receive WAAS from a satellite.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Neil Gould writes:


When we speak of GPS _usage_ in aviation, we are specifically and almost
exclusively talking about receivers.


I'm not sure who "we" are, but GPS is a navigation system, not just a
receiver.

Exactly, a system. WAAS is part of that system.

Steve Foley writes:

It's entirely possible he could give me an education on this subject, but
I'd rather go to a reliable source.

Better still, just don't depend on GPS for altitude.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Newps writes:

Your complete misunderstanding of the GPS system is showing. I have two
GPS's in the plane, one panel mount and one portable. It is rare that
either one is ever off by more than 100 feet in altitude. Using GPS for
your altitude for VFR flight would be perfectly fine.

I can see the NTSB report now: "Pilot failed to understand limitations
of GPS navigation." But as long as I'm not flying with you, I don't
care. Do what you want.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Newps writes:

Exactly, a system. WAAS is part of that system.

No, WAAS is a separate system.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.