GPS for NDB IAF on ILS?

Jose wrote:

Every NDB approach in the country was authorized as a GPS overlay approach when the
overlay program came into being. Since then, these authorizations have been withdrawn
for any particular runway end when a stand-alone RNAV (GPS) approach was published for
that runway end.

You cannot use GPS for any final approach segment that is not retreivable from the
database, and for good reason: no approach RAIM and no approach sensitivity.

I can see that for GPS approaches, where you are relying on all the
gee-whiz stuff (sequencing and such), but when the GPS is substituting
for a dumb radio needle, the approach segment doesn't have to be
anywhere to give good course guidance (which is all the NDB does anyway,
and it can be argued how good it is).

I still don't see the safety issue which would prompt the FAA to balk at
this substitution.

I am not their advocate; just stating the facts as established by Flight Standards.

You might want to ask the man in charge, John McGraw, Director, Technical Programs Division,
Flight Standards Service, FAA, at their DC head-shed address.

It's stupid. I can fly an NDB approach with a GPS and it's an easy
thing to do.

Jose wrote:
The only time you can't use [GPS] is to substitute for an ADF on an
NDB approach.


Any idea why that is?

Jose

Newps wrote:

Yes. The only time you can't use it is to substitute for an ADF on an
NDB approach.

Unless there is a GPS overlay for the NDB approach?

OK, you're right. That wouldn't technically be considered substitution.

--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Peter R. wrote:

Newps wrote:


Yes. The only time you can't use it is to substitute for an ADF on an
NDB approach.


Unless there is a GPS overlay for the NDB approach?

OK, you're right. That wouldn't technically be considered substitution.

He didn't have an approach box.

Thanks. Just got home and that was my interpretation of the AIM. As for
Jose's question, Newps answer concerns an NDB only approach, not a NDB GPS
overlay, and the reason being is that because in an NDB only approach you
must have the proper radios for the approach. If it only says NDB in the
approach title, you need an ADF receiver to fly the approach. You may
already know that, if so, sorry for beating it to death.

The AIM ref is:

(f) Charted requirements for ADF and or DME can be met using the GPS system,
except for use as the principal instrument approach navigation system.

Beyond that, one reason may be that a NDB only approach hasn't been blessed
by the FAA and converted to an NDB / GPS or an overlay.
Or, they may have a separate GPS approach. There are several near me that
they've not chosen to do an overlay, but instead created a separate GPS only
approach that aligns you better with the runway.

Other reasons I'll leave up to the rest of the group.

Jim

Jim Burns wrote:

Thanks. Just got home and that was my interpretation of the AIM. As for
Jose's question, Newps answer concerns an NDB only approach, not a NDB GPS
overlay, and the reason being is that because in an NDB only approach you
must have the proper radios for the approach.

Which is baloney. My terminal/enroute GPS has the NDB in its database.
There's no reason I can't fly the NDB approach with my GPS. And I'll
fly it 100 times more accurately than anybody else with an ADF.

Newps wrote:

Jim Burns wrote:

Thanks. Just got home and that was my interpretation of the AIM. As for
Jose's question, Newps answer concerns an NDB only approach, not a NDB GPS
overlay, and the reason being is that because in an NDB only approach you
must have the proper radios for the approach.

Which is baloney. My terminal/enroute GPS has the NDB in its database.
There's no reason I can't fly the NDB approach with my GPS. And I'll
fly it 100 times more accurately than anybody else with an ADF.

You guys should volunteer to represent AOPA at some of the industry meetings
that deal with all this stuff. Apparently, you guys are smarter than them
dim-witted AOPA technical reps.

wrote:
You guys should volunteer to represent AOPA at some of the industry meetings
that deal with all this stuff. Apparently, you guys are smarter than them
dim-witted AOPA technical reps.

I'm sure the AOPA guys are plenty smart about technical stuff.
They're also plenty smart about political stuff and know how to
conservive political capital so they can win the fights that are
winnable and worth winning.

I can sit here and accuse the FAA of having a bad case of
recto-cranial inversion when it comes to using GPS for NDB approaches
with no ill effect. It makes me feel good to say it, it may make you
feel good to read it, but in the end it doesn't change anything.

If the AOPA guys did that, they'd lose cred with the feds, and their
efforts on regulatory issues would suffer as a result. I'm not giving
AOPA $100 a year (or whatever it is) to beat up the FAA about silly
**** like which radio I'm allowed to use to fly an approach into
Podunk Municipal. I'm giving them the money to make sure I can still
fly at all.

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 10:30:44 -0800, wrote:



Newps wrote:

Jim Burns wrote:

Thanks. Just got home and that was my interpretation of the AIM. As for
Jose's question, Newps answer concerns an NDB only approach, not a NDB GPS
overlay, and the reason being is that because in an NDB only approach you
must have the proper radios for the approach.

Which is baloney. My terminal/enroute GPS has the NDB in its database.
There's no reason I can't fly the NDB approach with my GPS. And I'll
fly it 100 times more accurately than anybody else with an ADF.

You guys should volunteer to represent AOPA at some of the industry meetings
that deal with all this stuff. Apparently, you guys are smarter than them
dim-witted AOPA technical reps.


Much smarter. Probably better-looking as well.

I think the reason you aren't supposed to do it is that for a stand-alone
NDB approach, the accuracy of the location of the NDB in the GPS database
has not been verified.

"Newps" wrote in message
...


Jim Burns wrote:

Thanks. Just got home and that was my interpretation of the AIM. As for
Jose's question, Newps answer concerns an NDB only approach, not a NDB
GPS
overlay, and the reason being is that because in an NDB only approach you
must have the proper radios for the approach.

Which is baloney. My terminal/enroute GPS has the NDB in its database.
There's no reason I can't fly the NDB approach with my GPS. And I'll fly
it 100 times more accurately than anybody else with an ADF.