<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: WAAS Up &amp; Stalls At Altitude  &#8211; Part II</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?feed=rss2&#038;p=1769" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=1769</link>
	<description>A place to discuss safety-of-flight issues, procedures, techniques, and judgment.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:27:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim McSherry</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=1769&#038;cpage=1#comment-31165</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim McSherry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 13:53:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=1769#comment-31165</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#039;s some reference material, compliments of cfidarren.com:

&gt;&gt;&quot;from IFR Checkride Reviewer:

It&#039;s summertime, and people are flying more.  Operations are up, more avgas is being bought, and you can be sure ramp checks are on the rise.  Don&#039;t be caught arriving from an IFR flight without a current VOR check onboard. 

You can update yourself in the AIM 1-1-6, and take a look at 91.171 which says:

Each person performing the check shall record the date, place, bearing error, and signature in an appropriate written log.


Permissible error:

    * VOT 360 FR 180 TO, on airport, each VOR receiver ±4°
    * VOR checkpoint, on airport, each VOR receiver ±4°
    * Dual VOR check, ±4°
    * Ground reference point (from A/FD) against VOR radial, ±6°

The A/FD has information about VOT and VOR checkpoints available at airports. Airports make great ground reference points, see the A/FD for exact locations (distance &amp; radial) to perform the check.  &quot;

I&#039;m not sure about that last method, though.
Here&#039;s the AIM on the subject  (look at 1-1-4):  
 http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap1/aim0101.html

I hope that&#039;s more than you asked for.

Jim]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s some reference material, compliments of cfidarren.com:</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;&#8221;from IFR Checkride Reviewer:</p>
<p>It&#8217;s summertime, and people are flying more.  Operations are up, more avgas is being bought, and you can be sure ramp checks are on the rise.  Don&#8217;t be caught arriving from an IFR flight without a current VOR check onboard. </p>
<p>You can update yourself in the AIM 1-1-6, and take a look at 91.171 which says:</p>
<p>Each person performing the check shall record the date, place, bearing error, and signature in an appropriate written log.</p>
<p>Permissible error:</p>
<p>    * VOT 360 FR 180 TO, on airport, each VOR receiver ±4°<br />
    * VOR checkpoint, on airport, each VOR receiver ±4°<br />
    * Dual VOR check, ±4°<br />
    * Ground reference point (from A/FD) against VOR radial, ±6°</p>
<p>The A/FD has information about VOT and VOR checkpoints available at airports. Airports make great ground reference points, see the A/FD for exact locations (distance &amp; radial) to perform the check.  &#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure about that last method, though.<br />
Here&#8217;s the AIM on the subject  (look at 1-1-4):<br />
 <a href="http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap1/aim0101.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap1/aim0101.html</a></p>
<p>I hope that&#8217;s more than you asked for.</p>
<p>Jim</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim McSherry</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=1769&#038;cpage=1#comment-31164</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim McSherry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 13:31:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=1769#comment-31164</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jeff - 
Most of us have never been at a field where there was a VOT.  You should feel blessed. 
There are several other approved methods for performing the VOR check in the absence of a VOT.  In order of my preference:
 - (GCP)   ground check point : an identified position on the airfield at which the radial to/from  a nearby VOR is published.  We have such a spot at KPNE on taxiway F, for the terminal VOR which is on the field.  You taxi to the marked position, tune to the VOR, and center the needle.  It should agree with the identified radial within +/- 4 degrees

-  (dual VOR)  either on the ground or in the air, if you have two VOR receivers, you can tune them both to the same VOR, center the needles (TO or FROM, but the same), and read the OBS ring on each one; they should agree within 4 degrees on the ground, 6 degrees in the air.

or, in the air above a known position on an airway, tune the receiver to the proper VOR, and it should agree with the published radial for the airway within 6 degrees

In any case, record the check in writing using the Date, Error, Position (where tested) , and your Signature and have that written material available for the flight.  Many pilots or clubs keep a small notebook in a seat pocket and routinely make a test every few weeks, to keep within the regs.

Good luck.

Blue skies,
Jim]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff &#8211;<br />
Most of us have never been at a field where there was a VOT.  You should feel blessed.<br />
There are several other approved methods for performing the VOR check in the absence of a VOT.  In order of my preference:<br />
 &#8211; (GCP)   ground check point : an identified position on the airfield at which the radial to/from  a nearby VOR is published.  We have such a spot at KPNE on taxiway F, for the terminal VOR which is on the field.  You taxi to the marked position, tune to the VOR, and center the needle.  It should agree with the identified radial within +/- 4 degrees</p>
<p>-  (dual VOR)  either on the ground or in the air, if you have two VOR receivers, you can tune them both to the same VOR, center the needles (TO or FROM, but the same), and read the OBS ring on each one; they should agree within 4 degrees on the ground, 6 degrees in the air.</p>
<p>or, in the air above a known position on an airway, tune the receiver to the proper VOR, and it should agree with the published radial for the airway within 6 degrees</p>
<p>In any case, record the check in writing using the Date, Error, Position (where tested) , and your Signature and have that written material available for the flight.  Many pilots or clubs keep a small notebook in a seat pocket and routinely make a test every few weeks, to keep within the regs.</p>
<p>Good luck.</p>
<p>Blue skies,<br />
Jim</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeffrey Parker</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=1769&#038;cpage=1#comment-31138</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Parker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2011 23:55:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=1769#comment-31138</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bruce-
I recently moved to an airport that does not have a VOT on the field. What is the best way to check my VORs? My aircraft is WAAS equipped. Thanks.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bruce-<br />
I recently moved to an airport that does not have a VOT on the field. What is the best way to check my VORs? My aircraft is WAAS equipped. Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Earl Kessler</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=1769&#038;cpage=1#comment-31100</link>
		<dc:creator>Earl Kessler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jun 2011 18:24:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=1769#comment-31100</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I believe it was General Yeager who said there is never a reason to fly an airplane into a thunderstorm during peacetime.  I suspect this means ALL airplanes.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe it was General Yeager who said there is never a reason to fly an airplane into a thunderstorm during peacetime.  I suspect this means ALL airplanes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gerard</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=1769&#038;cpage=1#comment-31082</link>
		<dc:creator>Gerard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 18:16:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=1769#comment-31082</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I dont mean to split hairs, but I think what Pranesh meant was can small single engine aircraft of the type common to &quot;GA&quot;, fly thorugh CBs.  I believe there are larger &quot;GA&quot; aircraft that are capable.  Still best to keep your distance if possible.

Wikipedia says - &quot;General aviation (GA) is one of the two categories of civil aviation. It refers to all flights other than military and scheduled airline and regular cargo flights, both private and commercial. General aviation flights range from gliders and powered parachutes to large, non-scheduled cargo jet flights. The majority of the world&#039;s air traffic falls into this category, and most of the world&#039;s airports serve general aviation exclusively.&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I dont mean to split hairs, but I think what Pranesh meant was can small single engine aircraft of the type common to &#8220;GA&#8221;, fly thorugh CBs.  I believe there are larger &#8220;GA&#8221; aircraft that are capable.  Still best to keep your distance if possible.</p>
<p>Wikipedia says &#8211; &#8220;General aviation (GA) is one of the two categories of civil aviation. It refers to all flights other than military and scheduled airline and regular cargo flights, both private and commercial. General aviation flights range from gliders and powered parachutes to large, non-scheduled cargo jet flights. The majority of the world&#8217;s air traffic falls into this category, and most of the world&#8217;s airports serve general aviation exclusively.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pranesh Dey</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=1769&#038;cpage=1#comment-31081</link>
		<dc:creator>Pranesh Dey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 14:17:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=1769#comment-31081</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks Bruce (sir) for the reply.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Bruce (sir) for the reply.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Landsberg</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=1769&#038;cpage=1#comment-31078</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Landsberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 12:27:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=1769#comment-31078</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pranesh - It&#039;s not recommended. If you&#039;re lucky, you&#039;ll escape with bruises from the seatbelt and perhaps minor damage to the airframe. Or the aircraft could come apart with discouraging results.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pranesh &#8211; It&#8217;s not recommended. If you&#8217;re lucky, you&#8217;ll escape with bruises from the seatbelt and perhaps minor damage to the airframe. Or the aircraft could come apart with discouraging results.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pranesh Dey</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=1769&#038;cpage=1#comment-31051</link>
		<dc:creator>Pranesh Dey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jun 2011 13:04:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=1769#comment-31051</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Bruce, can GA aircraft ride through thunderstorms?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Bruce, can GA aircraft ride through thunderstorms?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Avi Weiss</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=1769&#038;cpage=1#comment-31032</link>
		<dc:creator>Avi Weiss</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2011 23:41:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=1769#comment-31032</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bruce;

Bruce;

The law seems reasonable as written: if you haven&#039;t checked the VORs, you cant use them. 

What seems unreasonable is being violated for not checking them simply because they are in the aircraft, irrespective of their use or not during IFR flight. In your friends case, he might have been able to be saved by pulling the ATC tapes and showing that he was either navigating via /g OR that he was cleared for GPS approach, which would have clearly demonstrated he wasn&#039;t using the VOR equipment, and thus not in violation of the reg.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bruce;</p>
<p>Bruce;</p>
<p>The law seems reasonable as written: if you haven&#8217;t checked the VORs, you cant use them. </p>
<p>What seems unreasonable is being violated for not checking them simply because they are in the aircraft, irrespective of their use or not during IFR flight. In your friends case, he might have been able to be saved by pulling the ATC tapes and showing that he was either navigating via /g OR that he was cleared for GPS approach, which would have clearly demonstrated he wasn&#8217;t using the VOR equipment, and thus not in violation of the reg.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cliff Crabs</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=1769&#038;cpage=1#comment-31023</link>
		<dc:creator>Cliff Crabs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2011 13:56:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=1769#comment-31023</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The way I understand it, It is &quot;coffin&quot; - not &quot;coffing&quot;!
(At least it was in the B-57)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The way I understand it, It is &#8220;coffin&#8221; &#8211; not &#8220;coffing&#8221;!<br />
(At least it was in the B-57)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
