"Stand Alone" Boxes (Garmin 430) - Sole means of navigation - legal?

I don't believe that is right. I think when they refer to "sole means
of navigation" they mean that you need to have other means of
navigation (separate NAV receiver). Think about it from a safety
point of view, forgat the legal requirements for a moment. If you
were in the soup and your Garmin died, what would you do? I would
never trust one instrument. The all-in-one feature of advanced GPS
units is nice, but you could lose the whole thing.

-Dave
PP-ASEL-IA

>Probably this has been answered in this forum previously, but I can't find
>it. Sorry.
>
>I recently got into a friendly discussion with a knowledgable CFII who said a
Garmin 430 could not be legally used as "sole means of navigation".
>Looking back, I think what he means is that "GPS" (even IFR certified units)
can not be used as sole means. Since the Garmin 430 contains not only TSO'd
GPS but also VOR, LOC, GS, etc., my position is that this unit (without any
other navigation equipment on board) is legal as a "stand alone" for use en
route, terminal, and approach . (I know charts are still necessary.)
>Please advise.
>

I would suggest finding another CFII who knows the TSO's. Absurd for someone
who is supposed to know material to make a statement like that. This is the
kind of CFII who insists that DME is required when flying above FL240, and the
a VOR receiver check is required <30 days prior to doing an ILS or localizer
approach while on an IFR clearance. Ridiculous.


paul k. sanchez, cfii-mei
on eagles’ wings
2011 south perimeter road, suite g
fort lauderdale, florida 33309-7135
305-389-1742 wireless
954-776-0527 fax
954-965-8329 home/fax
sanchezpaulk@

Dave Pascoe KM3T wrote

Generally speaking, your entire post is incorrect.

> I don't believe that is right. I think when they refer to "sole
> means of navigation" they mean that you need to have other means
> of navigation (separate NAV receiver).

A "means" of navigation refers to a "system" of navigation, not
the devices used to accomplish that means. ADF,VOR,GPS are means,
a King VOR receiver is a device to accomplish a means of navigation.


>If you were in the soup and your Garmin died, what
> would you do? I would never trust one instrument.

Many parts of the world still rely on the NDB/ADF system for
navigation. What would one do if that one ADF receiver fails?
Airliners navigated across the ocean for years using only one
LORAN A receiver.


Bob Moore
ATP CFII

"Dave Pascoe KM3T" <km3t@km3t.org> wrote in message
news:bks9kc$dio$1@rocky.tcnc.com...
>
> I don't believe that is right. I think when they refer to "sole means
> of navigation" they mean that you need to have other means of
> navigation (separate NAV receiver).
>

Hmmm.... That would mean that IFR flight with a single NAV receiver is
illegal.


>
> Think about it from a safety
> point of view, forgat the legal requirements for a moment. If you
> were in the soup and your Garmin died, what would you do? I would
> never trust one instrument. The all-in-one feature of advanced GPS
> units is nice, but you could lose the whole thing.
>

Do you trust one electrical system to power all of your NAV gear?

"Richard" <richard@ms.org> wrote in message
news:xmhcb.1931$qK1.2038019@news2.news.adelphia.ne t...
> Probably this has been answered in this forum previously, but I can't find
> it. Sorry.
>
> I recently got into a friendly discussion with a knowledgable CFII who
said
> a Garmin 430 could not be legally used as "sole means of navigation".
> Looking back, I think what he means is that "GPS" (even IFR certified
units)
> can not be used as sole means. Since the Garmin 430 contains not only
TSO'd
> GPS but also VOR, LOC, GS, etc., my position is that this unit (without
any
> other navigation equipment on board) is legal as a "stand alone" for use
en
> route, terminal, and approach . (I know charts are still necessary.)
> Please advise.

The pressure altitude input and operator input baro correction, such as the
new UPSAT unit, will be a requirement for "sole means".

John P. Tarver, MS/PE

In article <3f71b886$0$51870$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com> , "Ron Natalie"
<ron@sensor.com> writes:

>Since the Garmin 430 contains not only TSO'd
>> GPS but also VOR, LOC, GS, etc., my position is that this unit (without any
>> other navigation equipment on board) is legal as a "stand alone" for use en
>> route, terminal, and approach
>
>Yep. As a matter of fact, many new aircraft are delivered with only
>430/530's
>as nav equipement.

A single 430 should not be used with the Idea that a VOR will always be
available if the GPS goes south. I had the display in my 430 fail which made
the COMPLETE unit inop.( unless you knew where the com was and could count the
clicks :-) )

Chuck

"Fred E. Pate" <fepate@> wrote in message
news:bl8l19$f3v$1@news.Stanford.EDU...
> Tarver Engineering wrote:
>
> >
> > I do not believe "sole source" is regulatory. You may as well use the
term
> > "eanie beanie".
> >
>
> Sounds good to me. "Not approved for eanie-beanie navigation without an
> upgrade."

I wonder if Garman will offer an upgrade. Since they bought UPSat, there
seems to be a tendancy to orphan GPS systems.

<fepate@> wrote in message news:blbb96$l2v$3@news.Stanford.EDU...
> Tarver Engineering wrote:
>
> >
> >I wonder if Garman will offer an upgrade. Since they bought UPSat, there
> >seems to be a tendancy to orphan GPS systems.
> >
> >
>
> they've already committed to a WAAS upgrade for their GNS 430/530 boxes.

WAAS alone doesn't get you anything.