Tarver Engineering

"Richard Kaplan" <rkaplan@flyimc.com> wrote in message
news:0649e5cf70eaff69b32e0896c22e491f@TeraNews...
> There was an intresting talk at Oshkosh about the WAAS system by one of
the
> members of the UPSAT engineering team.
>
> As an aside, he defensively mentioned that the CNX-80 would be certified
for
> precision approaches in "fourth quarter 2003." The sales rep on the floor
> were more confident that certification would occur in October 2003. Who
> knows what exactly to believe.
>
> Perhaps more interestingly, he showed approach plates for
under-development
> WAAS LPV approaches to Gaithersburg, MD and Red Wing, MN with minimums of
> 250 - 3/4. Those approch plates had separate minimums listed for LPV,
> VNAV/LNAV, LNAV, and circling approaches. He indicated that currently the
> CNX-80 can only fly an approach down to LNAV minimums but ultimately it
will
> meet LPV minimums. However, when flying the LPV approach if the WAAS
system
> should be flagged as inoperative then the pilot could instead fly to
> VNAV/LNAV minimums.
>
> He indicated that current-generation non-WAAS receivers are not approved
to
> fly the precision VNAV/LNAV approaches yet the WAAS-approved CNX-80 will
be
> approved to fly VNAV/LNAV approaches with WAAS inoperative.
>
> The AIM is somewhat ambiguous on this topic, implying that VNAV/LNAV is
> separate from the WAAS system but requires accuracy equivalent to
barometric
> altimetry.
>
> I am not sure what to make of this, and I suspect there will be an
important
> learning curve when these approaches and these GPS receivers become more
> common.
>
> Any further thoughts?

This way you get something for all those WAAS development dollars.