NDB/RNAV approach

[bigD]

Well, it may be that I need to adjust my thinking on this. I suppose it's easy to make these comments when it's not my butt (or ticket) on the line!

Yeah, I don't think my DE ever made it clear about who was acting PIC. He did ask me if I wanted to reschedule since the ceiling was 300 feet, but he made it sound like he asked not because it was IFR, but because I'd be putting more time on the plane to fly somewhere to do nonprecision approaches. As I recall, the PIC issue never came up. This was years and years ago though, and my advancing age isn't helping my memory any!

 

[avbug]

Speaking of advancing age...if I had any hair left, I think I'd go for those dreadlocks...

 

[bigD]

Man, I can't believe I'm losing my hair already. It's disgusting.

 

[groundpointsix]

If it's an IFR certified and current RNAV unit, it should already have a the NDB in it. If not, it should be fair game for you to program it to have the NDB and use it, like non-certified GPS, as a backup for situational awareness.

If you do, you can also expect it ti "fail" during the checkride

BTW, if the DE asked you to fly an RNAV approach, would you be able to?

That's what I thought the answer would be. I also expect that he would indeed fail the unit. I confirmed it with a CFII friend of mine tonight who had come up with the same idea on his ride.

And yes, I could fly the RNAV approach. Too bad there aren't any within a 40 miles or so. (At least not for a VOR/DME unit)

 

[embdrvr]

It's been a long while since I took my instrument checkride but I still remember it well. We had postponed a few times due to visibility being well below landing mins at the home airport. The oral was already done and all we had to do was the checkride. Although the vis was fine checkride day there were many T-storms in the area and the skies were pretty ugly and gray. We went anyway and while I was under the hood we got in or near a small cell and got pounded. I remember watching the altimeter dance well beyond the published standards for for the ticket but I was more concerned with attitude than altitude. Right after we landed we had to run inside to get out of the hail.
Glad I didn't have to do that one a second time.

 

[tarp]

G.6, you said:

"My question is this: Since there is a transition route from a VOR w/ DME to the NDB, which is the IAF/FAF, can I legally use the RNAV to create a waypoint at the NDB and use it as lateral guidence on the approach? "

If the VOR is behind you and defines a transition route, why wouldn't you just fly "FROM" the station using the raw data VOR and the NDB in front. Why create a nebulous waypoint? Is it just so you can have it in front of you?

I agree with all that if an NDB approach is coming on your ride, the only unit that will eventually work on the approach will be the NDB, despite all your attempts to use RNAV's or GPS's or other sources. The thing I would be most afraid of (if you haven't practiced already) is the DME arc request. It is completely fair game for the examiner to ask you to just "fly an arc" as defined by some mileage off of a VOR.

One other thing with RNAV (VOR/DME) units. Watch the service volume (i.e distance from the VOR) when at low altitudes! Your friendly DE might be testing to see if you read that part of the AIM as well. Remember, below 1,000ft agl, the parabolic curve of a low service VOR falls from 40 miles to 10 miles of usable service (as compared to regular/high service model).

Our DE can play the best game of oneupmanship you've ever seen. Good luck on your ride.

 

[alvin]

I had my instr ride cancled 4 times by weather...I almost ran out of my 60 hour signoff before I took it...Then I had to learn a new plane, comm / nav panel etc...

I tried setting the GPS to act as a DME. As soon as it was set, the DE turned it off...


Don't sweat it...just go with whatever comes up

 

[avbug]

When I did my instrument rating practical test, there were no useable NDB's available. I created an approach using an AM radio station, and drew it up to match a Jepp chart. When the examine first saw it, he thought it was a legitimate approach, until he realized it was in pencil. He accepted it, I flew the approach successfully and to his satisfaction, and I got my instrument rating.

I had to buy six cases of crackerjacks before I found one with the ATP inside, however.

 

[A Squared]

When I did my instrument rating practical test, there were no useable NDB's available.

Was this because they hadn't been invented yet?

 

[avbug]

Didn't need them. We still were getting ample use out of two soup cans and some twine. And we were grateful!

(

And there were no operable NDB's or available NDB approaches within reasonable flying distance, or in the state)