boscomantico wrote:
Are you really asking that, Magnus?
Hehe, it was kind of a rhetorical question. The answer is of course ‘no’, especially considering previous posts. However, if you are used to have you flight plan rejected for various (sometimes cryptic) reasons and suddenly when it is approved, one can – incorrectly – assume that everything is fine and the surprise may come later in flight.
A common mindset (not in aviation of course) is “as long as nothing (bad) happens, we are ok” :-)
Time and again. I get puzzled by these questions.
Questions and answers is one of the great things about EuroGA so let’s welcome them 
The reality, unfortunately, is that it is damn hard to work out which bit of which country’s airspace needs Mode S.
Most people don’t even know which bit of the AIP might contain this info.
I wrote some notes on it here (needs updating a bit) and normally you find equipment requirement in AIP GEN 1.5 although often this just points to other bits of the AIP.
I get piles of emails with questions such as these and normally I send them to EuroGA because most of the time I don’t know the answers off hand
It’s easy for those who read the internet resources but those who just fly have no single point of reference.
Also with (formally) only B-RNAV equipment such as KNS-80 that needs a VOR/DME nearby and you get cleared to a fix say 200 nm away. The correct answer may be “unable”, but practically most pilots can comply these days.
Yes, absolutely so, and this is one of many parts of the ridiculous charade which aviation is in some many areas. ATC have been treating IFR navigation as a series of virtual waypoints, some of which may be physical navaids, but nobody cares if you can receive the navaid which you have just got a 200nm DCT to. GPS (INS in the case of big jets) is simply assumed and has been for perhaps 15-20 years. It is only the flight training establishment which pretends that navigation beacons are actually used for navigation! I guess they have value in the case of a loss of GPS reception but then you would call up ATC for vectors. I was at a Eurocontrol conference c. 2008 where they stated that radar vectoring by ATC is the fallback plan for a large scale loss of GPS.
BTW, your KNS80 will need an antenna filter in order to be FM Immunity compliant 
I have read your interesting notes on required equipment, Peter!
BRNAV (basic area navigation) approved navigation equipment is mandatory for IFR in controlled airspace all over Europe
In Sweden, at least, I am almost sure that the BRNAV requirement is only above FL95. That is a good thing for many aircraft owners such as flying clubs not having to spend a lot of money on upgrades, however not as good for club members wanting to go abroad. Again, it would be much easier if all countries in EU at least having the same rules and regulations implemented at the same time.
Regarding BRNAV approval, when I got my IR ticket I also got BRNAV approval written in. But a few pilot friends who did the IR just a few years earlier didn’t get it, so to be legal they have to stay under FL095 in Sweden (but no one ever asks..)
Magnus, did you get the BRNAV approval? How about the rest of you? PRNAV seems impossible atm and LPV isn’t decided yet, at least BRNAV is reality for GA :)
martin-esmi wrote:
Magnus, did you get the BRNAV approval?
Negative, not written in somewhere as I recall. I got my IR ticket in 2014. However the aircraft had BRNAV equipment (KNS80) and I used it (quite a lot) during my IFR training. (Including flights in the UK, BE and DE. But the iPad was always on standby of course…)
Strange, I did mine in 2013 and got the approval added in my logbook. This shows how confused everything is regarding *RNAV and personal approval.
Magnus wrote:
I just filed an IFR flight plan (test) in Germany without Mode S, and it was approved.
Unfortunately test filing is prohibited by Eurocontrol. If we see that on our system, the user gets one warning and then he’s out. Filing a flight plan allocates airspace capacity, causes delays, route changes, strips get printed at the centers, etc. There is absolutely no reason to test file a flight plan as the flight plan validation feature does everything you need.
BRNAV needs a pilot endorsement?
Unfortunately test filing is prohibited by Eurocontrol
The AFPEX app has a feature for it…
achimha wrote:
Unfortunately test filing is prohibited by Eurocontrol. If we see that on our system, the user gets one warning and then he’s out.
I think we’re talking about different tests perhaps. In our AROWeb at the Swedish Flight Planning Center you can choose to test the IFR flight plan, which only validates it with Eurocontrol and you get an approval or rejection back within a minute (TST_ACK)
That’s not filing, that’s just validating the plan. You said you filed it. The same can be done on the Eurocontrol NOP: https://www.public.nm.eurocontrol.int/PUBPORTAL/gateway/spec/
