When was the last time you used your ADF?

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
I've been flying instruments for over 10 years. I've never flown a single
NDB approach in anger (i.e. other than in training or to pass a checkride)
in all that time.

I once made an NDB approach in IMC to a field whose ILS approach was
pointing downwind at the time. Usually, though, my use of the ADF is for an
ILS's LOM.

--Gary

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...

I once made an NDB approach in IMC to a field whose ILS approach was
pointing downwind at the time. Usually, though, my use of the ADF is for
an ILS's LOM.


What field?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
link.net...

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...

I once made an NDB approach in IMC to a field whose ILS approach was
pointing downwind at the time. Usually, though, my use of the ADF is for
an ILS's LOM.

What field?

FRG (Farmingdale, NY).

Roy Smith wrote:
At this point, I can't imagine doing any
serious IFR flying without a GPS, and once you've got a GPS, there's just
absolutely no need for an ADF anymore (except for those very rare
exceptions of fields which only have an NDB approach and no GPS overlay,
and even then I'm not sure I'd be able to resist the urge to cheat).

I suspect you would not be able to resist the urge to cheat. If you
did, you would be the first one I know.

I don't have IFR GPS, and because of this shoot a lot of NDB
approaches. I've probably shot at least a dozen to within 200 ft of
MDA, a few in conditions where the airport could not be spotted from
more than 2 miles away in the fog and mist.

They are legally NDB approaches in the sense that I have an ADF in the
plane, and it works (and works well - on a quiet night I can tune in
NDB's as much as 60 miles away). In reality, I have LORAN and VFR GPS,
and either by itself is more accurate and more reliable than any ADF.
So the reality of my operation is that I always tune in the ADF, verify
reception, and proceed to shoot the approach using LORAN and GPS. I
will crosscheck with the ADF to make sure it's pointed pretty much
where it's supposed to be, but I don't try to make 1 degree corrections
with it. It's simply not accurate enough for that, and when the filed
is at mins and I have a real need to be there, I want to fly the best,
most accurate approach I can so I know exactly where to look for the
airport in the limited amount of time I will have to find it before
going missed.

Everyone I know who flies NDB approaches does something similar. Of
course if an FAA inspector were to ask me, I would tell him I flew the
NDB approach - and there would be no way for him to prove otherwise.

I used to make ADF-only NDB approaches part of my recurrent training
cycle, and I could consistently perform them to ATP standards after a
little practice - but I've decided that it's just not worth the time
anymore. GPS is just too accurate, too reliable, and too cheap to fly
IFR without it. Even I have faced the reality that the only value in
this day and age to being able to shoot an NDB approach without a VFR
GPS is being able to brag about having done it.

What bothers me is the loss of the ADF from the training environment.
The ADF forced the student to understand the difference between
heading, bearing, track, and course. That understanding, when
internalized, has intrinsic value (in terms of situational awareness,
over and above the strictly positional awareness that moving map GPS
has also made obsolete) in flying IFR. With careful attention to
detail on the part of both instructor and student this can be taught
without the ADF, but based on how many people complain of the extra
training time required to teach NDB approaches, I don't think it's
happening - mainly because without the ADF, there's no easy way to test
it on the checkride.

Michael

Michael wrote:

snip
What bothers me is the loss of the ADF from the training environment.
The ADF forced the student to understand the difference between
heading, bearing, track, and course.

Is it not possible to teach these same concepts using the GPS? Those
concepts are all relative to the GPS, too, no?

--
Peter

Its recently been added as a resquirement for the ILS 02 for KSAC. For
decades we've been flying that approach w/o ADF, apparently the FAA has
recently decided that ADFs are important.

-Robert


wrote:
Hello all,

I'm just curious as to when the last time was that you used your ADF
for actual navigation? Are NDBs common in the US? It seems as though
every little airport has an ILS!

-dr

Padres against the Tigers, third game of the World Series about twenty years
ago while VFR going from San Diego to Sacramento.

Jim

writes:

I'm just curious as to when the last time was that you used your ADF
for actual navigation? Are NDBs common in the US? It seems as though
every little airport has an ILS!

The more important first question is how many have a
/working/ ADF installed.

In article ,
"Peter R." wrote:

Michael wrote:

snip
What bothers me is the loss of the ADF from the training environment.
The ADF forced the student to understand the difference between
heading, bearing, track, and course.

Is it not possible to teach these same concepts using the GPS? Those
concepts are all relative to the GPS, too, no?

In theory, yes. In practice, "follow the purple line" works pretty well,
even if you don't really understand what you're doing.

wrote:
Hello all,

I'm just curious as to when the last time was that you used your ADF
for actual navigation? Are NDBs common in the US? It seems as though
every little airport has an ILS!

-dr


I flew a practice NDB approach at MIV (Millville NJ) a couple weeks ago,
just to prove that I could still do it. My safety pilot watched me
carefully on his own handheld GPS. I deliberately made sure my panel
GPS wasn't configured to watch the NDB or ground track. By the way,
Rainbow NDB is off-field, so speed control, wind correction, and timed
approaches are everything. The procedure turn went OK, but I arrived at
the airport about 30 seconds sooner than my estimated ground speed would
have suggested.

I don't mind NDB approaches. It's the crummy receivers that bother me.
I even did a partial panel NDB approach on my check ride some ten
years ago. And no, there was no LORAN or GPS on-board to suggest a
ground track.

That said, I won't do an NDB approach in IMC. I use the ADF receiver
with GPS overlaid NDB approaches, for LOM identification, for a cross
fix while flying on airways, and to assist with finding airports
(especially at destinations I am not familiar with).

I'd use it to listen to the MW AM broadcast band, but frankly the
programming on most stations is quite lacking.


Jake Brodsky
Cessna Cardinal N30946 @ FME