• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

HT Advice/Gouge Thread

DanMa1156

Land of the Milk and Honey.
pilot
Contributor
#16
Buddy who just showed up from the HTs to the squadron told me they got the 650.... couldn't believe it. So.... a training plane for basically all aircraft that do not nor will they ever have IFR GPS capability, that is equipped to fly LPV approaches, yet the Herc, which would benefit greatly from this product, is stuck with 20 year old stuff that is just shoved together and works some of the time? Nice.
While I'm not 100% certain, I'm under the impression that what they found was that one of the cheapest ways to upgrade the TH-57 fleet to be ADS-B compliant was to install a GTN-650. I've seen a few GA guys take a similar route with similar Garmin products (usually the 650 or the 900 I believe). It just so happens that we also now have LPV and VNAV with it as well. I don't think the going in mindset was "let's buy an upgraded GPS!!!" as opposed to "what's the most cost effective way that we can upgrade a 30+ year old aircraft fleet to be in compliance with FAA directives?"
 

ChuckMK23

Former H-46 Driver
pilot
#17
The introduction of modern area navigation skills and GPS approaches is a huge plus - LPV is the bread and butter of IFR terminal procedures now.
 

BACONATOR

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
#18
While I'm not 100% certain, I'm under the impression that what they found was that one of the cheapest ways to upgrade the TH-57 fleet to be ADS-B compliant was to install a GTN-650. I've seen a few GA guys take a similar route with similar Garmin products (usually the 650 or the 900 I believe). It just so happens that we also now have LPV and VNAV with it as well. I don't think the going in mindset was "let's buy an upgraded GPS!!!" as opposed to "what's the most cost effective way that we can upgrade a 30+ year old aircraft fleet to be in compliance with FAA directives?"
To your point, I can't wrap my head around how the Navy bought a $10k box plus install to fix a $3-5k ADS-B problem. Plus, is the syllabus going to include teaching students about various GPS approaches (LNAV/+VNAV/LPV)? I just didn't figure the ADS-B requirement was such a huge stumbling block to the Navy, and certainly not if they chose the 650 to solve it.
 

ChuckMK23

Former H-46 Driver
pilot
#21
How many fleet a/c can shoot GPS approaches? I don’t think there are that many. With that said, why do the HTs want this equipment?
If you aren't now, you *will be* soon - just to operate in teh national airspace system. I read on a lot of threads that the technical capability in a lot of aircraft are there - but the some "certification" is necessary to actually start leveraging.
 

DanMa1156

Land of the Milk and Honey.
pilot
Contributor
#22
To your point, I can't wrap my head around how the Navy bought a $10k box plus install to fix a $3-5k ADS-B problem. Plus, is the syllabus going to include teaching students about various GPS approaches (LNAV/+VNAV/LPV)? I just didn't figure the ADS-B requirement was such a huge stumbling block to the Navy, and certainly not if they chose the 650 to solve it.
I showed up to the HT's waaaay after the decision to procure it was made, but I doubt when buying in bulk like the HT's do, the Navy paid full price for it. Also, teaching a student "uh yeah, you can do LPV mins now) isn't particularly difficult. Ensuring they understand we have vertical guidance vice glideslope and getting them to understand the difference (thus making it a NPA) is maybe the most difficult part I've encountered thus far.
 

Gatordev

Well-Known Member
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
#23
If you aren't now, you *will be* soon - just to operate in teh national airspace system. I read on a lot of threads that the technical capability in a lot of aircraft are there - but the some "certification" is necessary to actually start leveraging.
It's significantly more complicated than that, at least in the -60s. The software is nowhere near capable in it's current form. The waypoints are there, but that's it. And given that we're just now getting AOP 16 in 2018...it's going to be a bit.
 

Jim123

molding (warping) the future of naval aviation
pilot
#24
The VORs are getting decommissioned, one by one, with a much cheaper to maintain skeleton network to remain. I can't imagine the TACANs surviving any better in the next ten years. But you can always put "request radar vectors to destination" in your flight plan remarks and file direct with your non-IFR GPS fleet aircraft. That's technically legal...

(You're welcome. Can I have my NAM?)
 

ChuckMK23

Former H-46 Driver
pilot
#26
The VORs are getting decommissioned, one by one, with a much cheaper to maintain skeleton network to remain. I can't imagine the TACANs surviving any better in the next ten years. But you can always put "request radar vectors to destination" in your flight plan remarks and file direct with your non-IFR GPS fleet aircraft. That's technically legal...

(You're welcome. Can I have my NAM?)
Hell we're upgrading you for that!

 

BACONATOR

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
#27
The VORs are getting decommissioned, one by one, with a much cheaper to maintain skeleton network to remain. I can't imagine the TACANs surviving any better in the next ten years. But you can always put "request radar vectors to destination" in your flight plan remarks and file direct with your non-IFR GPS fleet aircraft. That's technically legal...

(You're welcome. Can I have my NAM?)
I have actually brought that up to folks, about filing direct legally. It's usually met with some disbelief.
Is that legal? I guess if your aircraft equipment is limited, perhaps, but I vaguely remember there being a rule about not filing a distance >200nm inside an ARTCC facility's airspace. I guess maybe not "illegal" per se, but specifically addressed to NOT do. I mean all the FAIPs in AETC did it because they didn't know any better and it always resulted in them waiting on deck with an amended clearanced to their "GPS direct" filed FP, but it's one way to go, I guess. If we're talking helicopters though... I don't think the 200nm will be a factor.
 

Gatordev

Well-Known Member
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
#28
Is that legal? I guess if your aircraft equipment is limited, perhaps, but I vaguely remember there being a rule about not filing a distance >200nm inside an ARTCC facility's airspace. I guess maybe not "illegal" per se, but specifically addressed to NOT do. I mean all the FAIPs in AETC did it because they didn't know any better and it always resulted in them waiting on deck with an amended clearanced to their "GPS direct" filed FP, but it's one way to go, I guess. If we're talking helicopters though... I don't think the 200nm will be a factor.
We are having the discussion in a helo thread and talking about equipment limited aircraft (ie, VORTAC only).

If I'm in TLH and get cleared direct to CRG, and it's VMC, I think we'll be okay.

I've been in ATL's airspace and been cleared direct NRB with a /P code (and no installed GPS system). I declined, but it's not like they were looking for ways to give me a deviation.
 

Yardstick

Is The Bottle Ready?!
pilot
#29
Is that legal? I guess if your aircraft equipment is limited, perhaps, but I vaguely remember there being a rule about not filing a distance >200nm inside an ARTCC facility's airspace. I guess maybe not "illegal" per se, but specifically addressed to NOT do. I mean all the FAIPs in AETC did it because they didn't know any better and it always resulted in them waiting on deck with an amended clearanced to their "GPS direct" filed FP, but it's one way to go, I guess. If we're talking helicopters though... I don't think the 200nm will be a factor.
It’s only a rule if you’re a pussy. I file 1000 nm directs in the Merc routinely and atc lets me do what I want
 

mikwat

Active Member
pilot
#30
We are having the discussion in a helo thread and talking about equipment limited aircraft (ie, VORTAC only).

If I'm in TLH and get cleared direct to CRG, and it's VMC, I think we'll be okay.

I've been in ATL's airspace and been cleared direct NRB with a /P code (and no installed GPS system). I declined, but it's not like they were looking for ways to give me a deviation.

I went down to KDAB once VFR on top and got cleared for the RNAV when I asked for the ASR. /P the whole time. I swear they just assume you're RNAV capable.