If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
ADF and GPS equip %
"Peter" wrote in message
... It does suprise me how readily U.S. owners appear to chuck out the old equipment given that doing so does restrict the choice of alternates in many cases. .... The other reason for myself wondering about this is that Cirrus, as standard, have no DME or ADF. I've done the FAA IR recently (in the USA) and not having a DME really does seem a drawback. Really? Is it common to attempt to plan a flight and be unable to find a sensible alternate that has an ILS, VOR or radar approach without a DME requirement? Julian |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
ADF and GPS equip %
Peter,
not having a DME really does seem a drawback. How, when you have two GPS receiver very capable of showing distances (on a map, too)? -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
ADF and GPS equip %
50% of planes equiped with ADF, the ADF is BROKEN....
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
ADF and GPS equip %
It does suprise me how readily U.S. owners appear to chuck out the old
equipment given that doing so does restrict the choice of alternates in many cases. Weight and panel space. once you are heading to the alternate this becomes irrelevant and you can fly the approach with the GPS anyway. This is true, but irrelevant. If you don't have the ADF when you file, your options for filing are limited. If you don't have a legal alternate you can't go. The only way th is is a "way around the regs" is if you toss the ADF out the window during the flight (and also complete the necessary paperwork). Jose -- Nothing takes longer than a shortcut. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
ADF and GPS equip %
In article ,
Jose wrote: It does suprise me how readily U.S. owners appear to chuck out the old equipment given that doing so does restrict the choice of alternates in many cases. Weight and panel space. In a plane used for training, there's a much more serious reason to tear out the ADF. If you go for an instrument rating checkride in a plane that has an ADF in it, the examiner can (and probably will) ask to see an NDB approach flown. Maybe even partial panel. Which means you need to train students to fly partial panel NDB approaches (and holds). What a frigging waste of time and money. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
ADF and GPS equip %
Which means you need to train
students to fly partial panel NDB approaches (and holds). What a frigging waste of time and money. I disagree, although NDB approaches are rarer, learning and doing them requires (and creates) a better sense of positial awareness, and thus a better IFR pilot. Jose -- Nothing takes longer than a shortcut. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
ADF and GPS equip %
On 04/01/06 07:09, Roy Smith wrote:
In article , Jose wrote: It does suprise me how readily U.S. owners appear to chuck out the old equipment given that doing so does restrict the choice of alternates in many cases. Weight and panel space. In a plane used for training, there's a much more serious reason to tear out the ADF. If you go for an instrument rating checkride in a plane that has an ADF in it, the examiner can (and probably will) ask to see an NDB approach flown. Maybe even partial panel. Which means you need to train students to fly partial panel NDB approaches (and holds). What a frigging waste of time and money. In my experience, each different approach to doing something (like a hold or an SIAP) provide a firmer foundation for learning how to deal with difference situations. I'm very happy that my training included ADF work and NDB approaches. But ... that's just my opinion ;-) -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane Cal Aggie Flying Farmers Sacramento, CA |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
ADF and GPS equip %
I was thinking of the BBC, which, incidentally, is funded by the UK
television licence fee. http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/licencefee/ Your opinion of the BBC may vary, of course, but if you want to decide for yourself, take a look at http://news.bbc.co.uk/ Tim. On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 18:10:17 -0700, "Matt Barrow" wrote: "Tim Auckland" wrote in message .. . and there are places in this world that have informative, unbiased, commercial-free television channels. Who'd have imagined such a thing? g Tim. On what planet? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
ADF and GPS equip %
On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 07:56:45 +0100, Peter wrote:
It does suprise me how readily U.S. owners appear to chuck out the old equipment given that doing so does restrict the choice of alternates in many cases. With a CNX80 or any other box certified under TSO146, there is no particular restriction as to choice of alternates. Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA) |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
ADF and GPS equip %
"Jose" wrote in message m...
Which means you need to train students to fly partial panel NDB approaches (and holds). What a frigging waste of time and money. I disagree, although NDB approaches are rarer, learning and doing them requires (and creates) a better sense of positial awareness, and thus a better IFR pilot. Jose -- An RMI presentation, with the ADF pointer on an HSI, not only provides the positional awareness Jose praises, but it also vaporizes much of Roy's concern about difficulties in teaching NDB approaches. The examiner can't demand an NDB approach without the HSI, and the RMI presentation makes NDB approaches very intuitive. HSIs are extremely nice instruments, either stand-alone or in PFDs. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|