NCO.IDE.A.195 Navigation equipment
Aeroplanes shall have sufficient navigation equipment to ensure that, in the event of the failure of one item of equipment at any stage of the flight, the remaining equipment shall allow safe navigation in accordance with (a), or an appropriate contingency action, to be completed safely.
Thanks @NCYankee for the background, so theoretically now one in US can fly “GPS only” without Radar coverage and without VOR/ILS in his pannel? (subject to higher minima for RNP approach only without VOR/ILS and max 500NM for cruise filing)
NCO.IDE.A.195 Navigation equipment
It give a lot of room for having a contingency plans? it’s up to the PIC to figure that out?
I doubt it means: to fly IFR in CAS in IMC you need Radar, VOR, DME, ADF…
The same for planing GPS only, from Oct2022 you can fly on GPS alone but you have to sort out the mess
@lbra I don’t think it means ded reckoning!
Why not? in clouds & oceans it’s different but at least when flying with ground in sight, visual navigation a rock solid contingency plan if GPS is lost (DR nav is even considered far superior and way more robust by some pilots & regulators than equipment as the latter can fail)
Maybe it’s different for Class Alpha airspace as one can’t fallback to VFR? but I doubt visual navigation is not an enough backup to loss of “VOR only” or “GPS only” operations…
Ibra wrote:
so theoretically now one in US can fly “GPS only” without Radar coverage and without VOR/ILS in his panel?
The main regulation for IFR required equipment is 91.205(d)(2) which simply states:
Two-way radio communication and navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown.
A WAAS GPS satisfies the navigation equipment requirement in 91.205(d)(2) as would a VOR/ILS receiver. A TSO C129 GPS may only be used for supplementary navigation, IOW a VOR receiver would still be required equipment for IFR in the US. The AFMS will have a limitations such as: “The aircraft must have other approved navigation equipment appropriate to the route of flight installed and operational.” So if the aircraft was just equipped with a GNS400W, that would be fully legal to fly IFR, but a GNS400 would not be unless the aircraft were also equipped with a VOR system. Radar is a separate issue and not an equipage issue. When operating on random routes (meaning not on airways), radar monitoring is required. There is an exception for GPS equipped aircraft in that radar monitoring is not required when the aircraft is operating on a point to point random route under 500 NM and the points are in the DB. A route that is direct to a fix is a random route, but does not lie along a point to point route and it would require radar monitoring, even if GPS is used.
Edit: A point to point route when filed in a flight plan can be checked in the ATC computer so that the assigned altitude is at least 1000 feet (2000 feet in mountains) above all obstacles and terrain within +/- 4 NM of the center line of the route. This is the MIA (Minimum IFR Altitude).
A WAAS GPS satisfies the navigation equipment requirement in 91.205(d)(2) as would a VOR/ILS receiver. A TSO C129 GPS may only be used for supplementary navigation, IOW a VOR receiver would still be required equipment for IFR in the US. The AFMS will have a limitations such as: “The aircraft must have other approved navigation equipment appropriate to the route of flight installed and operational.” So if the aircraft was just equipped with a GNS400W, that would be fully legal to fly IFR, but a GNS400 would not be unless the aircraft were also equipped with a VOR system
That is my understanding as well in EASA land under NCO (PIC decide on his route, the route require a range of equipment specs to be carried, the AFM will have route approval for those specs or any legal backups)
500nm is lot on GPS 
well there is max off-route DCT on FPL validation at Eurocontrol (about 200nm which is max range of VOR), bellow 10kft if you ask for 200nm direct, FIS/ATC will tend to remind you will be going outside controlled airspace or radar coverage as things gets patchy in the typical 8kft normally aspirated piston cruise
For backups it’s mostly common sense: solid panel full of backups with modular instruments is way better but one has to adapt his backup & minima to his equipment, in theory, one should no depart with LPV & ILS at minima as 99% of GA aircraft don’t have two glideslope indicators in case the GS display fails…
