X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [97.101.2.163] (account marv@lancaironline.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WEBUSER 5.2.12) with HTTP id 3515099 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 08:11:24 -0500 From: marv@lancair.net Subject: Re: Are you WAAS ready? To: X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser v5.2.12 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 08:11:24 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <8984A39879F2F5418251CBEEC9C689B3E868B4@lucky.dts.local> References: <8984A39879F2F5418251CBEEC9C689B3E868B4@lucky.dts.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Posted for "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen@dts9000.com>:

 I was curious.  A lot of money has been spent on WAAS capable or upgrading
GPS to WAAS.  So the GPS is ready to go to low minimums, but how many GA
pilots are actually capable of flying safely to WAAS minimums?  Or should I
say, THINK they are capable to flying to WAAS minimums safely?  I would ask
for a show of hands from the pilots that 'thought' they were capable of flying
to minimums, but I guess I won't get any responders there.
 
 Yes, I bought a CNX-80 a long time ago for that very reason, yet I find I
haven't changed my personal minimums one bit.  My personal minimums vary more
with flying frequency and practice than how much my GPS glitters with
capability.  An aged old question with a new twist.  Which is safer, a high
time pilot with a standard GPS with lots of current IFR hours and plenty of
simulated and actual approaches or a weekend airplane driver that has 30 hours
this year and shot one approach to 200' above minimums with his WAAS GPS 3
months ago.  
 
 I hope that we don't fall for the trap that even though the WAAS may make you
legal for lower, it doesn't really make you more capable for lower, so don't
hang your hat on WAAS.
 
 Chuck Jensen