Instrument XC approaches

[timeoff]

Does the FAA consider a VOR and a VOR/DME as being different types of approaches for the 250nm cross country under part 61.65?

 

[midlifeflyer]

"Three different kinds of approaches with the use of navigation systems" is not the clearest but, based on the now-defunct Part 61 FAQ, FAA Flight Standards policy is to require 3 approaches that use three different course guidance navigation systems, like LOC, NDB, VOR, SDF, GPS...

Form this standpoint, there's no difference between VOR and VOR/DME and I'm pretty sure they are not considered different "kinds" of approaches for the purpose of the reg.

 

[timeoff]

Thats what I was afraid of. I originally thought that having an approach that required two pieces of equipment as opposed to one would qualify a difference. But since both are technically a VOR, they can be considered the same.

 

[Tonala2k]

Crazy FAA. Would they consider a VOR and LOC App to be the same type? Your best option would be to have your CFI ask the examiner you plan to use what his/her interpretation is.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

Crazy FAA. Would they consider a VOR and LOC App to be the same type? Your best option would be to have your CFI ask the examiner you plan to use what his/her interpretation is.

The VOR and LOC are two different types.

Here are some that could be considered different.

VOR or VOR/DME
ILS
LOC
NDB
GPS
SDF
LDA


If you find an ILS you could shoot the ILS and come around for the LOC on the same runway if mins. are published.

 

[Tonala2k]

Amish, what I don't get (just because I disagree with the idea, not that I'm saying my way is right and I'm a pompous instructor) is this. Let's take an ILS, you likely have 3 approaches there, ILS, LOC, LOC BC. Each is a different type and I agree with that. But I also agree that VOR and VOR DME are different. (Timeoff, please not this pure opinion I'm spouting off) One uses pure timing, and/or intercepting radials, the other uses DME. I strongly feel that if the FAA needs to distinguish the approach with a different then it qualifies as a different approach. Granted, I don't dare try challenging that idea with a student pilot going for their instrument. I keep it ILS, VOR and GPS/NDB as appropriate to the aircraft. Would you have any references to what qualifies a type?

 

[midlifeflyer]

Tonala,

There's a list in the defunct Part 61 FAQ.

==============================
QUESTION: How does FAA define the requirement that three “different kinds of approaches” must be completed during a cross-country flight for an instrument rating?

ANSWER: Under the April 4, 1997, final rule for part 61, the FAA consciously did not specify the kinds of approaches a pilot must perform in order to comply with the requirement under § 61.65(d)(2)(iii)(C). A pilot seeking an instrument rating must complete the cross-country aeronautical experience requirement by simply performing three different kinds of approaches, i.e., using thee different kinds of navigation systems. A pilot may choose any three of the list below:

1. Non-directional beacon (NDB)
2. Localizer-type directional aid (LDA)
3. Very high frequency omnirange station (VOR)
4. Global positioning system (GPS)
5. Simplified direction facility (SDF)
6. Instrument landing system localizer (LOC).
==============================

You'll notice that this list is even more limited than Amish's since it doesn't appear to separate an ILS from a LOC.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

I think the logic for NOT making a distinction between the VOR and VOR/DME are the mechanics of tracking. Essentially, they are both the same. For instance, the ILS tracking differs from VOR tracking due to the increased sensitivity aside from the requirement to follow both a vertical and horizontal course.