Jerry:
Two responses. I think what Greg is really worried about and I as well is the problem of losing the MFD from an electrical or other problem. Without the paper chart backup, there is nothing to fall back upon. So why spend all the money for the fancy electronic paperless cockpit if you still need the paper chart? No question, the idea of a nice crisp approach plate on the Avidyne would be terrific but the multiple database update costs for that service PLUS the Garmins AND the paper all for the SAME data gets to be a bit much.
My second point to you and Art: The FAA says it is legal to use an expired database to shoot an instrument approach with the Garmin AS LONG AS THE APPROACH HAS NOT CHANGED from the last database update. So if you know the instrument approach on the way home has no revisions since the last database update, you can still do it legally until you get home. But you need to be sure their are no revisions and that would be evident on your paper charts which come a week before the old charts expire.
I am at Gaithersburg as well but do not have the Cirrus yet. The place has not changed since you were last there except they finally repaved the runway a few years ago.
Brian
I tried to get the internet option, but they are in the process of developing a new system and are no longer selling the data writer. So they are mailing the updates until the new data writer becomes available. But the updates usually arrive the day before (or after) the database expiration and I will be in MHK then.
GAI seems to be surviving and even returning to normal. Gas service is slow and over priced, the hangers are in terrible shape (except for the new ones which go for $600 a month) with a 10 year waiting list. The lowest available approach is 700’ AGL, you still have to watch for deer and birds on the runway. The north south VFR flyway is gone and the east west one is only 1 mile wide. But it is convenient.
The FAA says it is legal to use an expired database to shoot an instrument approach with the Garmin AS LONG AS THE APPROACH HAS NOT CHANGED from the last database update.
I just finished my semianual reading of the FAR/AIM (2002). According to it, I can fly in the enroute and terminal areas without a current database as long as I verify that the waypoints have not changed, but to fly an approach or use the GPS as DME, I must have a current data base (table on 1-1-40 and paragraph on 1-1-44). Some argue the AIM has no legal standing, but the SR20 POH says the same thing, and I understand that we are obligated to follow the dictates of the POH
Brian, I responded to the current database question in a reply to Art but I wanted to address the concern about losing the MFD as well. To me there are two reasons you could lose the MFD. First, you could have a complete electrical failure and second, the instrument itself could fail. In the former instance having paper charts won’t help. In the latter you have the approach in the database and that gives you all the lateral guidance you need. You can get the required altitudes from the controller.
Thanks for the update on GAI. When I flew there it was a sleepy airport in the middle of nowhere. My house was a townhome in a new development across from the National Bureau of Standards. Last time I was in DC I drove up there and now it’s wall to wall houses and shopping malls.
Progress.
Art amd Brian, The question of expired databases is interesting. I agree with Brian that as a practical matter if you know the approach has not changed you could safely fly it with an expired database. I also agree with Art when he says it’s not Kosher. The AIM clearly says an expired database is OK for enroute and terminal operations as long as all information is confirmed to be current. For approaches, they must be RETREIVED FROM A CURRENT DATABASE. I asked one of our FAA inspectors of his interpretation and he said unequivocally that the database had to be current to be legal. I’m curious if Brian got any different interpretation from the FAA in the Eastern Region.
If you had an out of date gps.But the approach had not changed unlikely in that short of time. Then what would be the diferance . If it came down to it details. Just fly it rite and dont push the limits of the approach or yourself. Have a flight and a nice day. From Don
The difference is that if I am an FAA inspector looking for a bust, I hang around the airport the first couple days after the GPS databases expire and looking for a new plane flying an instrument approach which requires GPS, DME, or ADF. When one lands I do a ramp check specifically requesting to see his database card.
Art:
This really gets down to one of those technicalities again that we all seemed to get bogged down in discussing. Since the new database cards arrive early before the actual start date, would you be busted if you installed the new database before leaving on your trip and then flying the approach based on a future rather than current database?
On any given day an FAA inspector could probably find a reason to bust anyone for something. My discussions with FAA officials have convinced me that they are NOT in the business to do that. If you flew a normal instrument approach without complications and no one complained about you, the inspectors would, 99.9% probability stay off your back.
I would have no reservation about taking that next trip of yours.
Brian
I agree that the probability of difficulty is minimal. Not zero but minimal. I also agree that the safety risk of using an outdated database if you check and see that the approach has not been changed is virtually zero.
It’s like driving 56 in a 55 zone. the risk of being “busted” is not zero, but it’s minimal.
So far I have recieved 2 updates. The first one arrived the day after the old database expired. The second one arrived the day before the old one expired. Based on past performance I can be fairly certain that the next one will not arrive before I leave.
It won’t stop me from taking the trip. However, if on the return I can’t get the visual to FRH I will fly to my alternate (BMG) which has an ILS that does not require ADF or DME. This database problem has made me realize how poorly equiped the Cirrus is to fly without a GPS. I think they would have served us better to give us 1 GNS530, an ADF, and a DME.
Art:
You are actually on to something here. I have often wondered if having 2 Garmin 430’s is overkill. Had a hard time deciding on the “C” package for that reason. If you lose GPS capability then you only have The VOR without DME or ADF for a backup. For ultimate redundancy that may have been a better idea but I think Cirrus is thinking that ADF and DME may be outdated in a few years.
But, I think Jerry below has the right attitude. I would NOT get hung up on cross over database updates and think your GPS is not useful if you are off a day or 2. Nobody really cares if there are no changes in the approach.
Brian
If you lose GPS capability then you only have The VOR without DME or ADF for a backup.
The alternate airport (BMG) of the previously mentioned trip has 6 non GPS instrument approaches, but only 2 of them are usable without ADF or DME. This becomes a consideration not only if the GPS becomes unavailable, but since an alternate airport must have usable non GPS approaches you could find your alternate airport selection limited as well.