Readback: October 2019

First, we checked with Garmin and their equipment actually decodes the Morse code identifier rather than rely on GPS and the tuned frequency to look it up in the boxs database. So far, so good. We next checked with Mark Kolber, our regs guru, and he pointed us to AIM 1-1-3.c. That paragraph talks about navaid identification in general, pointing out that merely hearing Morse code isnt enough because it could be transmitting TEST. Likewise, live voice transmissions from FSS or ATC dont indicate a valid navigation signal. The prize, though, is in the paragraphs last sentence, If your equipment automatically decodes the identifier, it is not necessary to listen to the audio identification. So, Rick, youre right. If the box decodes and displays the Morse code identifier, you can rely on that.

Key Takeaways:

• Pilots using modern avionics that automatically decode and display navaid identifiers are not required to audibly confirm the Morse code, as supported by FAA AIM 1-1-3.c.
• Concerns exist regarding aviation's increasing reliance on GPS and the inadequacy of current backup systems (like the Minimum Operating Network) in the face of frequent GPS jamming and potential outages, with suggestions for robust alternatives such as an advanced eLoran system.
• FAA regulations (91.113) are ambiguous regarding right-of-way between an aircraft on a 45-degree pattern entry and one already on downwind in non-towered operations, leading to differing interpretations among experts, though ultimate responsibility for collision avoidance rests with all pilots.

Key takeaways sponsored by Aviator Pro | Start Your Training ->

See a mistake? Contact us.