U.S. Experimental requirements for IFR

[peter-h]

Here in Europe there is a lot of debate about whether they will ever allow aircraft which do NOT have an ICAO CofA to fly under IFR.

This is banned everywhere in the world (in essence) except in the USA.

There are some optimistic noises being made now, however...

I wonder what sort of requirements they have in the USA?

Do you need to have IFR (certified) avionics for it?

To fly say LPV, do you need a "W" type GPS?

To fly an ILS, can you use a handheld radio which displays the LOC and GS (they do exist).

On "plastic" aircraft, do you need to have the static bonding required on the certified ones?

 

[Jim Logajan]

For what it is worth, I found the following two chief counsel interpretations regarding non-TSO EFDs in experimentals:
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...nterpretations/data/interps/2009/Rourke-1.pdf
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...nterpretations/data/interps/2009/Rourke-2.pdf

 

[Jim Logajan]

But then there's the question of what constitutes "installed." The FAA has, in the past, gone on record as saying they refused to define it on purpose. Generally, they have concluded that hardwired power and screws to mount is "installed," but that hasn't been a consistent interpretation.

"Wherever we turn we find that what are called good laws are apt to be called so because men see- that they promote a result that they fancy desirable, and do not see the bill that has to be paid in reactions that are relatively obscure. ... the only thing that can be assumed as certainly to be wished is that men should know the rules by which the game will be played." -- Oliver Wendell Holmes (Collected Legal Papers)