GPS for NDB IAF on ILS?

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 10:26:27 -0800, wrote:

I guess that you mean that sarcastically. Without RAIM is is possible to have a sudden loss
of accuracy that would exceed the widths of an NDB final approach segment.


I think everybody is saying that the same loss of accuracy exists with
ADF receivers, especially the older ones, all the time.

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 10:29:29 -0800, wrote:



wrote:

Beyond stupid.

I can use a cruddy old ADF receiver that was manufactured in the stone
age and provides no distance information with a highly innacurate
signal and questionable reliability, but the FAA won't "allow" the use
of a certified GPS.

My Garmin Street Map GPS beats an ADF hands down.


Your Garmin Street Map is just as accurate as a Garmin 500. It doesn't
have the integrity that 500 has, though.

I'm not comapring it to a 500.

I'm comparing it to an ADF receiver.

On 11 Feb 2005 13:41:05 -0500, (Roy Smith) wrote:

How much integrity does an ADF have? I'll take an non-RAIM-ified
purple line over "it's still beeping" any day.

Especially after you've flown a few NDB approaches and look down and
see the transmitter coming up below your right wing and see the needle
pointing left of the nose.

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.

Roy Smith wrote:


How much integrity does an ADF have? I'll take an non-RAIM-ified
purple line over "it's still beeping" any day.

All that "proves" is that ADF, at least the way its used in light aircraft,
is no good.

OTOH, in Eastern Europe, where NDB approaches used to be the only way to get
into a lot of places, and the aircraft had RMIs and two ADF receivers, the
pilots got good results in lock-stepping the usual two NDBs.

This is something the USAF neither understood nor was equipped to do when
they took out Secretary Brown.

wrote:

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 10:29:29 -0800, wrote:



wrote:

Beyond stupid.

I can use a cruddy old ADF receiver that was manufactured in the stone
age and provides no distance information with a highly innacurate
signal and questionable reliability, but the FAA won't "allow" the use
of a certified GPS.

My Garmin Street Map GPS beats an ADF hands down.


Your Garmin Street Map is just as accurate as a Garmin 500. It doesn't
have the integrity that 500 has, though.

I'm not comapring it to a 500.

I'm comparing it to an ADF receiver.

Well, I was comparing the two.

wrote in message
...
On 11 Feb 2005 13:41:05 -0500, (Roy Smith) wrote:

How much integrity does an ADF have? I'll take an non-RAIM-ified
purple line over "it's still beeping" any day.

Especially after you've flown a few NDB approaches and look down and
see the transmitter coming up below your right wing and see the needle
pointing left of the nose.

A dyslexic NDB?

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Y'All,
The ILS existed in 1930 much as it is today. But bureacratic rules required
zero-zero performance for government financing. It was not until weather
and operational conditions successfully killed more airmen than all combat
opereations that reason and logic allowed the military use of the ILS.

I am in the process of composing a technical paper that I hope will
give the 'new' FAA a jump start in a safety program that will break
all existing safety records in most major categories. More another time.
Gene Whitt

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.

Gene Whitt wrote:



I am in the process of composing a technical paper that I hope will
give the 'new' FAA a jump start in a safety program that will break
all existing safety records in most major categories. More another time.
Gene Whitt

Must be great to be the only person with such special insights.