"Other approaches"

[MTpilot]

I have a student who is ready for his instrument ride. Only problem is ya have to shoot at least 3 approaches no two of which can be VOR based, we don't have GPS in our airplanes, we do have an ADF but there is no NDB approach on the field, the examiner said he couldn't make one up for the local NDB because the FAA won't let them do that anymore. No PAR or SAR available. The approaches we have are VOR A, B, C and the ILS 11. (KMSO). Any Ideas?

 

[Rattler71]

I have a student who is ready for his instrument ride. Only problem is ya have to shoot at least 3 approaches no two of which can be VOR based, we don't have GPS in our airplanes, we do have an ADF but there is no NDB approach on the field, the examiner said he couldn't make one up for the local NDB because the FAA won't let them do that anymore. No PAR or SAR available. The approaches we have are VOR A, B, C and the ILS 11. (KMSO). Any Ideas?

How about VOR, ILS, and back course if one is available, if not, can you just ignore the glideslope and shoot a localizer only?

Rattler71

 

[Lil Jon]

hmm thats tough unless you go to another airport. what about a LOC only? goodluck

 

[minitour]

Only problem is ya have to shoot at least 3 approaches no two of which can be VOR based, we don't have GPS in our airplanes, we do have an ADF but there is no NDB approach on the field, the examiner said he couldn't make one up for the local NDB because the FAA won't let them do that anymore. No PAR or SAR available. The approaches we have are VOR A, B, C and the ILS 11. (KMSO). Any Ideas?

How about ILS 11
VOR-A
ILS-11 Localiser only Circle to the opposite direction?

If possible to do the ILS (LOC only) approach w/ the PT (if allowed) that would be cool. If not, do the VOR-A with the PT, the ILS and LOC with Vectors to Final.

That's all I got...maybe there's another ILS in the area you can have him do w/o the GS....

-mini

 

[MTpilot]

I pilled wine on my computer I m loing letter .

Hmmmmmmm..... Loclizer only, I will hve to run tht by the eminer.

 

[Rattler71]

hmm thats tough unless you go to another airport. what about a LOC only? goodluck

My thought exactly.


Rattler71

 

[minitour]

Hmmmmmmm..... Loclizer only, I will hve to run tht by the eminer.

Tell him to have your stu go missed on the opposite direction circle if he's not convinced it's hard enough...lots of peeps forget the turn toward the landing runway on the miss...

-mini

 

[User546]

Hmmmmmmm..... Loclizer only, I will hve to run tht by the eminer.

And tell the examiner to get you a new keyboard, yours is leaving out ALL kinds of letters! j/k

 

[lowlycfi]

I've had a similar situation come up with a few of my instrument students that were using one of our 172s that only had dual VOR receivers and nothing else. The examiner I use was always cool with having the student fly a VOR approach, an ILS, and then a localizer to the same runway. Thankfully we have another 172 now with an ADF.

 

[Sundevil]

How did you meet the requirements for the IFR cross country? Did you fly to an airport with an NDB approach? Be careful with using an ILS for one approach and a ILS- localizer only for a second approach on the cross country. We had an instructor do that with a student, and the FAA inspector said that the ILS and LOC approaches did not count for the requirement of doing three approaches using different navigational facilities and they had to do the x/c over again. I guess that according to them, an ILS is an ILS whether you do it as a precision or a non precision approach. I thought that was a bad interpretation of the rule since the approaches are flown much differently, but that's what the guy said.
I don't have a PTS, but I am pretty sire that there is no requirement to do 3 approaches using "different" navigational facilities on the practical test.

 

[minitour]

I guess that according to them, an ILS is an ILS whether you do it as a precision or a non precision approach.

wow...so if the Glide slope is out of service, they still consider it the same approach?

(to clarify)
ABC airport has ILS ry 12R
DEF airport has ILS ry 28 but the GS is out.
GHI airport has VOR approach

That cross country wouldn't count?

-mini

 

[MTpilot]

Any ATC'ers

I can't use a localizer only approach cause there aren't any localizer only minimums. Thanks for all the info fellas. Does anyone know where to find the criteria for par's and asr's, just wondering why we can't get em here. I imagine it has to with radar coverage.

 

[Rattler71]

I can't use a localizer only approach cause there aren't any localizer only minimums. Thanks for all the info fellas. Does anyone know where to find the criteria for par's and asr's, just wondering why we can't get em here. I imagine it has to with radar coverage.

Without knowing the approach you are talking about, but usually ILS's show approach minimums if the glideslope fails. Just look at the ILS approach plate and see if it is there. If it is not, I appologise.

Rattler71

 

[Fly_Chick]

The PTS requires one precision and two non-precision approaches. Can you do a localizer back course off of the ILS, a VOR and an ILS?

 

[EatSleepFly]

Is it really that far to another airport with an NDB approach? Sounds like that's your only option.

 

[MTpilot]

Big Sky Country

It looks like I'll have to send him to Helena for an NDB. It takes about an hour to get there in a 172, I'll probably have him do the whole thing with an examiner over there instead of having an extra couple hours of checkride. There are no loc only mins for this approach and no published backcourse, although I do think those would both satisfy the requirements if they were available. Thanks for all the info Fellas.

 

[xjcaptain]

Why not just talk to the examiner and ask him what he would like to do on the checkride. (If he doesn't like to give out specifics ask him how long you should reserve the aircraft for (assuming a rental). If you have to fly elsewhere that way you can plan accordingly timewise.

 

[MTpilot]

Well, the main idea is just to avoid a four hour checkride. Two extra hours of flying is just two extra hours for my student to screw up, not that he would of course...

 

[minitour]

Yeah, not sure I like the idea of going an hour away to shoot an approach and then an hour back.

What happens if he doinks the NDB? Then he's got to fly back for an hour knowing he busted the check ride...then go back another hour to shoot the NDB again. Thats a lot of hobbs time...and a lot of time to think about doinking the ride. Not saying he would, but it could happen.

-mini

 

[Lead Sled]

Oops, my bad.

 

[minitour]

Mini,
Here's a homework assignment for you...

Get out the C-172RG's POH, go to the suppliment section and read up on it then return and report.

'Sled

uh...wrong thread?

 

[Lead Sled]

uh...wrong thread?

Sorry about that. You're right, wrong thread. How did that happen?

 

[minitour]

Its all good man...

Yeah, I checked the "Glide Slope", and it shows a picture of a LOC/GS with "ARC" on it, but...uh...I'll be d@mned if it says what it does..

Airplane flying handbook perhaps? Instrument handbook?

Anyway...I'll let ya know if I see anything

Sorry bout the "mini-threadjack"...back to your regularly scheduled programming...

FBO or MESA (IMO)

-mini

 

[Tinstaafl]

MTPilot, you said the examiner isn't allowed to 'make up' an approach but what about using a published NDB approach from another airport? One from a high-ish elevation so the MDA is at or above the 25mi MSA for your local airport?

That provides safe terrain separation for the operation. The catch would be that any circling requirement will still have to use a local approach but any requirement to demonstrate a missed approach can be met if the chosen, non-local NDB approach only relies on the navaid for the missed.