Flying through LA SFRA while VOR is out of service

[-]

Heel-Judder@reddit

How do you plan to navigate the SFRA if you don't have any of the required navigation equipment?

[-]

aaronw22@reddit

Turn off the transponder and send it, obviously.

Although they were probably hopefully planning on using foreflight or the like on their personal device.

[-]

Heel-Judder@reddit

You could probably get away with doing that. It wouldn't be legal, though.

14 CFR 93.95(d) in conjunction with AC 90-108.

[-]

If you read 93.93 which directly precedes 93.95, the definition of the SFRA is very specifically laid out in terms of visual references on the ground, including freeway intersections and other prominent landmarks. Operating on a radial (if we’re using the definition of being established on an airway that IFR pilots are held to) allows considerable leeway that can be easily met through pilotage and dead reckoning.

A competent VFR pilot flying a legally-equipped aircraft is well within their rights (legally) to fly this route using nothing more than a paper TAC chart and timer, backed up by their eyeballs. For SA, they can further back that up with their smartphone running an EFB with GPS overlay of a SMO-SMO/132/010 or similar course plotted on a LA TAC.

[-]

Heel-Judder@reddit

Hey, thanks for the input. I went back and read 93.93. It lays out the boundaries of the SFRA based on geographic landmarks, as you described.

However, I have to disagree with your assessment. The physical layout of the corridor has nothing to do with how pilots are required legally navigate the corridor. In the case of the subsequent FAR, 93.95, "the pilot shall operate on the Santa Monica VOR 132° radial" is not a compromise. You must be able to navigate using that radial. As we all know, if the VOR is out of service, a suitable RNAV system is an acceptable source of navigation.

I've flown the SFRA corridor many times. And while I agree that it can be navigated using ground references, it is not legal. You would certainly find yourself in violation of 93.95(d) if things went south.

Furthermore, the visibility and marine layer can easily obfuscate those ground landmarks. That's why they are not approved for navigation.

Imagine if the marine layer was covering the western side of LA, including LAX. You would not be able to navigate using ground references, but you could still easily do it in the corridor if you had appropriate navigation sources. That is why the regulation is written the way it is.

[-]

Rainebowraine123@reddit

TBF, it says "on" the radial, not "using" it. As long as you are physically located on it, I see no legality issue.

[-]

Heel-Judder@reddit

I'd like to see you pull that off on a jaunt through the corridor with a FSDO inspector next to you.

[-]

dat_empennage@reddit

If there’s 500OVC layer over LAX no one’s sending a VFR-only Cub through the SFRA, as they would rightfully be dinged on Careless and Reckless operation due to lack of visual fallback on a flight requiring visual references (ie the strongly recommended position reports called for in the SFRA)

Being required to operate on a radial does not somehow require one to go upgrading a panel to a TSO’d IFR GPS. If the FAA actually intended that they’d actually specify minimum required equipment in the reg.

There are no minimum performance standards for VFR GPS for advisory guidance (TSO, FAA Orders) that I’m aware of. There are also no continuing airworthiness requirements for VFR-only GPS nav sources which would be an absolute necessity if they started to be considered mandatory equipment on a VFR procedure.

I’ve still not seen anyone come up with a clear regulatory argument for why an iPad GPS overlaying a radial + pilotage backup with a current chart doesn’t meet the regulatory burden of the LA SFRA.

[-]

Heel-Judder@reddit

I have been through the SFRA many times over the top of a marine layer. That's not careless and reckless operation. It's entirely legal. It's called VFR over the top. If you meet the cloud clearance requirements, then you're good. That's half the point of the SFRA ;)

Agreed. There are no minimum performance standards for a VFR GPS. That's why the regulation strictly calls out utilizing the SMO VOR, and no other means of navigation.

You do have latitude to stay safely within the airspace boundaries. But if you landed on the other side of the SFRA without a VOR receiver or a GPS and got a ramp check...guess what would happen?

[-]

dat_empennage@reddit

Do you have a reg, case law, an LOI or other data to back up your last claim?

Going over the SFRA in a plane lacking panel VHF nav or GPS, with an undercast, in an ASEL, most definitely meets the threshold for careless and reckless. Tons of NTSB Court dockets showing pilots getting dinged on that reg for far less. By contrast, navigating by pilotage on a CAVU day to stay on the radial specified is relatively easy to justify given the landmarks available, and keeps your eyeballs outside where they should be, in a busy VFR corridor

[-]

Heel-Judder@reddit

I'm not sure what you mean by my "last claim."

Perhaps I misspoke, but I never once navigated the SFRA without suitable navigation equipment and appropriate cloud clearance requirements. I have read and interpret the regulations. I know what is and isn't required to operate in certain airspace. I'm not creating my own rules by saying things like "keep your eyeballs outside to use as navigation in a corridor." Eyeballs are to be used to see and avoid traffic, not for navigation in a corridor which requires pilots to use a local VOR radial for navigation.

[-]

aaronw22@reddit

Absolutely concur on both the wisdom and legality of having no onboard navigation possibilities for this mission

[-]

link_dead@reddit

Not planning on taking maps and eyeballs? We navigated before GPS...

[-]

aaronw22@reddit

LA SFRA rules say (among others) “shall operate on the SMO 132 radial”

[-]

dat_empennage@reddit

If the FAA wanted you to be equipped with a VOR or TSO’d GPS, they would write the regs to actually say that.

“Shall operate on” != having a VOR set (which many airplanes increasingly are completely forgoing anyway). It means just that… somehow navigating within the lateral bounds of that radial (as defined by 93.93) to standards acceptable under VFR (being able to back uP guidance by pilotage)

[-]

link_dead@reddit

You can do that with a map though....

[-]

randomoniummtl@reddit

Draw a line in foreflight and fly it with that

[-]

Heel-Judder@reddit

Are you legally allowed

[-]

TurkishDrillpress@reddit

No

[-]

cwa45@reddit

It’s legal in some reality

[-]

mduell@reddit

There's a lot of landmarks for dead reckoning.

[-]

Heel-Judder@reddit

Sure. It can easily be done illegally.

[-]

dat_empennage@reddit

The SFRA is a VFR corridor. Again, VFR.

As long as you have VFR equipment in accordance with 91.205, and transponder/ADSB per 91.215 (as indicated by the TAC inset with the procedure) you simply have to guarantee that you can somehow conform to the SMO 132 radial the chart specifies (or, in the absence of it, fly a route such that you cross overhead the charted VFR reporting points at the correct altitudes)

I have not come across an actual FAR that states the SFRA requires an airplane to be equipped with a panel-mount nav system of any sort. Open to that being challenged based on an actual reg, not just “a DPE/buddy told me during a checkride”.

[-]

OrganVoiceMusicMan@reddit

The SFRA is not a VFR corridor like the corridor over SAN. You are actually in Bravo airspace so you must comply with the instructions for how to transition the Bravo at that point. The visual chart supplement states “The pilot shall operate on the Santa Monica very high frequency omni-directional radio range (VOR) 132° radial.” Since GPS is an approved substitute for navigating VORs but the good ol’ eyeball is not you must have the equipment as stated in the supplement.

[-]

Rainebowraine123@reddit

It is a VFR corridor though. The only other option would be IFR, which it obviously isn't.

[-]

burnheartmusic@reddit

There’s probably a notam that explains more. When I did it with smo out of service they required that you have a WAAS gps

[-]

e3027@reddit

It certainly doesnt require a WAAS GPS. My airplane has an IFR approach legal non WAAS gps. There is an argument to be made about if the regs requires a TSO GPS.

[-]

Sharp_Experience_104@reddit

Probably not legal (“shall”) as others have stated. The bigger issue is the neglect of the VORs—a system with much greater resilience than satellite-dependent GPS. Foolish.

[-]

Jwylde2@reddit

GPS is an approved substitute

[-]

phatRV@reddit

The only required equipment is navigational lights and section 91.215 which is about transponder.

[-]

Jwylde2@reddit

Wrong. The LA SFRA route is built on the 132° radial of the SMO VOR. This requires you to track the 132° radial SMO VOR inbound/outbound, which requires at least one nav receiver. GPS is a legal substitute.

[-]

dat_empennage@reddit

Please cite a relevant FAR. The procedure itself only requires you to track the SMO132 radial. It does not require you to actually use a panel-mount VOR or RNAV system to do so.

[-]

Jwylde2@reddit

The procedure itself only requires you to track the SMO132 radial.

And just how do you propose to do that when the radial only exists when the VOR ground station is in service?

Anytime the SMO VOR is out of service, the Mini Route is not available and the Special Flight Rules Area is only available to aircraft with suitable RNAV equipment.

Even though ForeFlight and other handhelds can accurately show the 132 radial if properly programmed, handheld devices are never allowed by the FAA to be used as the primary means of navigation in the National Airspace System. They may only legally be used as an aid to situational awareness.

[-]

dat_empennage@reddit

Again, FAR citation please. There’s no requirement for a VFR aircraft to have an FAA-approved GPS to navigate any charted procedure in the NAS. Likely because (news flash) the FAA expects pilots to back up unapproved navigation sources with the Mark 1 eyeball, via pilotage with respect to the reporting waypoints already in the procedure.

[-]

Jwylde2@reddit

Other way around. Mk I eyeball is primary in VFR. The “V” in VFR meaning “Visual”. Portable GPS, EFB, can be used as supplemental navigation.

You’re not going to find a FAR because it’s all in the equipment certification. That’s a whole other can of worms.

Look up AC90-108

[-]

EHP42@reddit

The Cessna 152 I use does not have GPS

[-]

phatRV@reddit

You don't have to have GPS NAV or VOR nav equipment. You just have the ability to navigate the VOR radial which is a straight line. So an iPad magenta line is okay

[-]