Exactly that is the point, yes.
However, EASA must define a certain minimum equipment which in ANY CASE, airspace non withstanding, must be carried. And as far as I undestand it, that equipment must be fully functional, regardless of the local restrictions you may encounter. What I am starting to ask myself is if the Swiss ARC entry is actually EASA compliant or whether this could be actually challenged.
I can’t have the ADS-B out enabled because EASA requires a STC each aircraft type for this and this would cost me £ 12-15 K in EASA paperwork.
EASA seems to want a proof that the total system latency from computation of the GPS position to ratiating it is less than 1.something seconds. They might have a point for a supersonic fighter jet, but for a C152?
have simply got their avionics shop to connect it up anyway
The guys at EDMS didn’t want to…
2x Coms of which one 8.33
AFAIK in Switzerland, no 8.33kHz radio is currently required (until 2018), however if you want to claim 8.33kHz compliance, then both radios must be 8.33kHz. And of course any new radio installed now must be 8.33kHz.
NATS have introduced this “experiment” to allow uncertified GPS boxes to be used as a GPS source for ADS-B.
Why is this an experiment? As long as the containment radius radiated is set to unknown… Then the transmission could be used for traffic information, but wouldn’t be used for separation (and it wouldn’t satisfy the ADS-B mandate of the FAA).
If the NIC containment radius is unknown or SIL or SDA are zero, a certified unit can’t display the target.
AFAIK in Switzerland, no 8.33kHz radio is currently required (until 2018), however if you want to claim 8.33kHz compliance, then both radios must be 8.33kHz. And of course any new radio installed now must be 8.33kHz.
Wonderful. Will need to check this with my avionic shop. Might be a show stopper for the whole IFR project.
If the NIC containment radius is unknown or SIL or SDA are zero, a certified unit can’t display the target.
Too bad for certified avionics. But I’m fairly sure PowerFlarm will.
That behaviour doesn’t make much sense to me. No position source can be as inaccurate to be useless for traffic advisories
Urs if you want to install a second GNS430 you’ll have two 8.33 radios and you’re all set :)
True Shorrick, but I have to finance that too. Apart from the fact that apparently dual GNS installations seem to be a rather complex thing in terms of STC and if it is allowed.
Jesse, I understand that the DME is compulsory for IFR in Germany and Switzerland under all circumstances, so a inop DME would mean you are VFR only. Now I do wonder how the difference is really. What does EASA mandate you absolutely need? I understood that a DME is ALWAYS required in Europe, along with the dual nav/com, BRNAV and so on, but I may well be wrong. In which case, I wonder whether the national gold plating by Germany and Switzerland is actually not EASA compliant.
I doubt that. I think this has recently changed, as it has been changed in the netherlands (was 2xCOM, 1xNAV+GS, MODE S, ADF, DME, MB), now it says what is needed to carry out the Amsterdam FIR (notice that this is again airspace requirement, so also valid for foreigners).
EASA Part NCO (Non Commerical Non Complex Operations) says:
GM1 NCO.IDE.A.195 Navigation equipment
APPLICABLE AIRSPACE REQUIREMENTS
For aeroplanes being operated under European air traffic control, the applicable airspace
requirements include the Single European Sky legislation.
For those have a look at:
Eurocontrol requirements for civil aircraft
Do notice that there are tabs on that page to switch from COM to NAV for example.
however if you want to claim 8.33kHz compliance, then both radios must be 8.33kHz.
This is what Eurocontrol says for single or dual 8,33 kHz
Depending of the size of the aircraft and the kind of operation, this could mean that only one set of 8.33kHz COM is required.
That in combination with the AOPA Germany results I would try to convince them that a single radio is sufficient for your operations, which is basically the “low” end of the market for them.
