GPS with expired database

[new182]

I am told that the FAA is now enforcing rules if a GPS has an expired database and/or if the database update is not logged in as a maintenance item.
Does this refer to IFR use only?
I know that it is not a requirement to have an updated database for VFR flight, but are you required to label a GPS with an expired database as inoperative or something like "gps is for vfr use only"?
A friend of mine who is part 135 is certain that a gps with an expired database must have a placard for ifr or vfr use. He believes the rule applies to any pilot with a GPS, whether general aviation, part 135, etc

I read that if any GPS is updated the update is logged as a maintenance item but the tagging as inoperable only applies to ifr use.

 

[bbchien]

In part 135 ops, the MECHANIC has to update the database and log it. Part 91 however, you are still okay doing it youself. and demonstrating that you used VOR land NAV or DR to get there, if the database is outdated.

But it's just so much easier to keep it up. Your friend is correct for part 135, but 135 only.

 

[thomascannon]

Doesn't need a placard and you can use it for situational awareness while ifr but can't do any GPS approaches.

 

[SCCutler]

Doesn't need a placard and you can use it for situational awareness while ifr but can't do any GPS approaches, unless you have verified the accuracy of the approach data for the affected approach.

FTFY.

 

[wsuffa]

FTFY.

Not true, Spike. To use a GPS for approaches, the waypoints have to pull from a current database. For ENROUTE and TERMINAL areas, it's sufficient to verify the waypoints (assuming that is permitted by the AFM supplement for the GPS).

See the AIM in 1-1-19(f).

f. Equipment and Database Requirements

1. Authorization to fly approaches under IFR using GPS avionics systems requires that:

(a) A pilot use GPS avionics with TSO- C129, or equivalent, authorization in class A1, B1, B3, C1, or C3; and

(b) All approach procedures to be flown must be retrievable from the current airborne navigation database supplied by the TSO-C129 equipment manufacturer or other FAA approved source. The system must be able to retrieve the procedure by name from the aircraft navigation database, not just as a manually entered series of waypoints.

(c) Prior to using a procedure or waypoint retrieved from the airborne navigation database, the pilot should verify the validity of the database. This verification should include the following preflight and in-flight steps:

 

[sba55]

Not true, Spike. To use a GPS for approaches, the waypoints have to pull from a current database. For ENROUTE and TERMINAL areas, it's sufficient to verify the waypoints (assuming that is permitted by the AFM supplement for the GPS).

See the AIM in 1-1-19(f).

Unless this has changed (very possible), verifying all the waypoints was (is?) enough to fly an IFR approach with an expired database. But I do remember that there was something more to that - maybe it was only for specific GPS units; as in, if the GPS limitations allowed for this.

Can't remember exactly, but I do think Spike has (or used to) have a point...

 

[poadeleted20]

Unless this has changed (very possible), verifying all the waypoints was (is?) enough to fly an IFR approach with an expired database.

It wasn't always this way, but now you can fly an approach with an expired database as long as the approach itself is up-to-date in your databse. You don't have to verify each waypoint, just make sure that the date of the database is not earlier than the date of the last change to the approach you're going to fly. This change was made last year, I believe. The exact words from the current AIM Section 1-1-19: "Requires current database or verification that the procedure has not been amended since the expiration of the database." To make that easier, the FAA is changing the change dates in the lower corner of the approach charts from Julian to ordinary calendar dates.

 

[sba55]

It wasn't always this way, but now you can fly an approach with an expired database as long as the approach itself is up-to-date in your databse. You don't have to verify each waypoint, just make sure that the date of the database is not earlier than the date of the last change to the approach you're going to fly. This change was made last year, I believe. The exact words from the current AIM Section 1-1-19: "Requires current database or verification that the procedure has not been amended since the expiration of the database." To make that easier, the FAA is changing the change dates in the lower corner of the approach charts from Julian to ordinary calendar dates.

That's great to know Ron. Wow - a thoroughly reasonable change from the FAA!

-Felix

 

[John Collins]

It wasn't always this way, but now you can fly an approach with an expired database as long as the approach itself is up-to-date in your database. You don't have to verify each waypoint, just make sure that the date of the database is not earlier than the date of the last change to the approach you're going to fly. This change was made last year, I believe. The exact words from the current AIM Section 1-1-19: "Requires current database or verification that the procedure has not been amended since the expiration of the database." To make that easier, the FAA is changing the change dates in the lower corner of the approach charts from Julian to ordinary calendar dates.

It has always been legal for the GNS430W/530W/GNS480 and the Apollo GPS units. The wording in their AFMS have always permitted this. We discussed this ad nauseam before the AIM was finally updated to reflect its reality. It still requires the AFMS to permit it. Since the legacy GNS430/530 AFMS sample and most other GPS units don't permit it, unless the wording was changed and approved by the FAA, the AFMS being regulatory still trumps the AIM which is not regulatory, so those units would still require a current database.

Both Jeppesen and AeroNav changed the format of their approach charts back in October 2009 and added a new date to the charts called the "Procedure Amendment Date" by Jeppesen. The AeroNav charts kept the Julian date for the effective date but moved it from the bottom left hand corner of the chart to the upper right hand corner. They added the new date in the place vacated by the original Julian chart effective date and use the calendar date format "Aug 25 2011". Jeppesen puts the new date on the left hand edge next to the amendment information in a vertical format along the edge of the chart.

The procedure amendment date does not change just because the chart is updated, it has to affect the approach data in the GPS database in order for it to be updated. This was done to allow changes that do not affect the approach data in the database to still be verified when the chart was updated. Examples of changes to a chart that would not affect the approach data in the database would be frequencies, taxiways, notes, even a change in the MDA or DH.

 

[Palmpilot]

Since the legacy GNS430/530 AFMS sample and most other GPS units don't permit it, unless the wording was changed and approved by the FAA, the AFMS being regulatory still trumps the AIM which is not regulatory, so those units would still require a current database.

I turned down a GPS approach because of this a couple of weeks ago. (It was a rental plane, and the owners have apparently decided not to keep the database up to date.)

 

[wsuffa]

Duly corrected.

Sorry Spike for questioning.

(Where's the "hangs head in shame" smilie? )