Can an aircraft operate IFR without ground-based navigation?

egid
  • Can an aircraft operate IFR without ground-based navigation? egid

    If I were to redo my avionics to only include a WAAS GPS unit and two comm radios, would anything prevent me from operating IFR? 14 CFR 91.205(d) only states that my airplane must have:

    (2) Two-way radio communication and navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown.

    I'm aware that this is not the most bulletproof way to fly hard IFR. In this case, assume that the aircraft is primarily used for currency/proficiency and the occasional light IFR flight.

  • The AIM contains the information required to operate under IFR using GPS1.

    To summarize the requirements, WAAS (but not "traditional" GPS) may be used stand-alone without an alternate means of navigation provided:

    • Installation requirements:
      • The WAAS navigation equipment is approved in accordance with TSOC145 or TSOC146
      • The installation is done in accordance with AC 20-138
    • Operational Requirements:
      • The WAAS AFM procedures are followed
      • It is not be used by a commercial operator
    • Preflight Requirements:
      • The GPS database is current
      • The GPS database provider does not have any notices prohibiting the use of any fix or procedure that you are going to use
      • GPS NOTAMs/Aeronautical Information is reviewed prior to each flight
      • A RAIM prediction for the time and route is done that shows no loss of RAIM
      • The flight plan navigation equipment is listed as RNAV

    Note that commercial operators are required to have redundant systems or ground based backups in order to use it, and while not required for you, it's a pretty good idea.


    1 More specifically, see:

    AIM Chapter 1, Section 1 - Navigation Aids

    • 1-1-18. Global Positioning System (GPS)
      • d. General Requirements
      • e. Use of GPS for IFR Oceanic, Domestic En Route, Terminal Area, and Approach Operations
      • f. General Database Requirements
    • 1-1-19. Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS)
      • c. General Requirements

Related questions and answers
  • If I were to redo my avionics to only include a WAAS GPS unit and two comm radios, would anything prevent me from operating IFR? 14 CFR 91.205(d) only states that my airplane must have: (2) Two-way radio communication and navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown. I'm aware that this is not the most bulletproof way to fly hard IFR. In this case, assume that the aircraft is primarily used for currency/proficiency and the occasional light IFR flight.

  • I once had a traffic controller give me a hard time about how I requested IFR clearance once in the air. I had previously filed an IFR flight plan, and took off from my untowered home airport. On approach control's frequency, I said: Tampa Approach, Cirrus 123AB, 5 miles southeast of Tampa Exec at 1000 feet, IFR to Ft. Lauderdale Exec The approach controller responded, annoyed, saying something like "Well do you have an IFR flight plan or are you reporting IFR??" I had always used that phraseology because it seems the least wordy way to get the info across, which can be helpful when

  • routes, or route segments which meets obstacle clearance requirements for the entire route segment and which assures acceptable navigational signal coverage only within 25 statute (22 nautical) miles of a VOR. Whereas the MEA is: MINIMUM EN ROUTE IFR ALTITUDE (MEA)- The lowest published altitude between radio fixes which assures acceptable navigational signal coverage and meets obstacle clearance requirements between those fixes. The MEA prescribed for a Federal airway or segment thereof, area navigation low or high route, or other direct route applies to the entire width of the airway

  • Hi – Here’s the scenario: The flight starts night VFR, with broken ceiling at destination (class C airspace) and expected to improve according to the pre-flight abbreviated briefing. I'm IFR certified but prefer to stay VFR to dodge icy clouds along the way. Now I’m about 15nm from my destination, talking to approach control, and the ATIS calls the ceiling overcast: it's apparent I'll have... on the ground/view of rwy)? c). other? BTW: I did read How do you request a "pop up" IFR clearance? . In my scenario I have the time to call FSS, there is no emergency, I'm on flight following

  • There are various services that use world-wide Boeing Winds for forecast wind data which can be used to calculate an approximate flight time between two locations. They usually have best case, worst case, and average case for each location, altitude, and date in the future. I have searched and searched Google to no avail. Where can this wind data be found, and how can it be used in a commercial product? For those of you who don't know what the Boeing winds are, I found this description of their software product on am informal message board (not related to Boeing): PC WindTemp

  • I'm pretty sure that there are no aircraft equipped with a brake on its nose wheel, however two of my colleagues think there might have been. Are there? Aircraft with retractable gear of course have devices to stop the wheels from spinning when retracted, but I'm asking about brakes used to stop or slow down the aircraft. Please don't consider aircraft with a tail wheel, gliders, experimental aircraft, or aircraft used for flight testing (certified aircraft only).

  • A airspace. ... So my questions are: Is the phrase "compliance with the advisory is necessary to avert a substantial risk of collision between two or more aircraft" defined somewhere or is there any guidance to say when the report is required? I.e. is it anytime that we get an RA (even if we visually have the aircraft in sight), only if we actually respond to an RA, or is it if the two... Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) office when: ... (10) Airborne Collision and Avoidance System (ACAS) resolution advisories issued either: (i) When an aircraft is being operated

  • Why is it that black boxes don't float? From what I gather the answer is: So they will not float away from a water crash site. The ping can be heard underwater with sonar. Finding the ping, finds the site. But why not have two black boxes one that floats and one that stays with the aircraft? That way if a plane is lost at sea, if we find the black box floating, we could use the data to find the other black box and the crash site. Plus the benefits of having a redundancy are enormous.

  • So the answer in my mind is "of course pilots can fly circling approaches at non-towered airports" (seriously, I could swear that I've done it before, but then again I can't think of any specific examples....). That is, until I ran across this little tidbit in the Air Traffic Control Order while researching another question: 4-8-6. CIRCLING APPROACH a. Circling approach instructions may only be given for aircraft landing at airports with operational control towers. So then the question becomes, why do they have circling minimums at non-towered airports?? No tower here. ATC

  • I was looking at potential experimental projects when I read this fascinating website about a tiny aerobatic-capable twin-engine airplane. It's light enough to be an ultralight, but much too fast: Aside from the obvious fun of flying this little plane, I wondered whether: I'd be able to log time in the Cri-Cri as multi-time? My guess is yes. Assuming I'm MEL-IFR, could I log multi-IFR with a two-way radio, altimeter, Dynon-type AI, HI and at least one cert. VOR & glide slope? An approach cert. GPS setup would be too heavy I assume. My guess is this is wishful thinking...

Data information