Maule Driver wrote:


Jim Macklin wrote:

He had a GPS, but as a high time commuter pilot in a BE1900, he didn't
know how to use it. Their GPS was not current for IFR, but they were
using it. When they crossed the LOM, the GPS autocycled to the MAP
WPT and the crew just did a turn about a point and flew at the IAP
altitude past the airport and died.

I'm not familiar with the KLN 90B but fly a Garmin 300XL which I believe
is of similar vintage and function. In addition, my single CDI is wired
so that it would auto-connect to the NAV radio when tuned to a LOC signal.

Using the Garmin on such an approach to function in place of the ADF and
DME, I would have programmed it similarly. However, flying the
approach would require switching it from 'auto-sequence' to 'hold' just
before passing BALES for the holding pattern turn. That would keep
BALES as the next waypoint. Once inbound to BALES, I would have
switched it to auto=sequence.

Does the KLN 90B function similarly? That is, is there a Hold switch?

I can't speak for a KLN 90B, but we have an 89B in our club Arrow. It
doesn't have a hold switch, but if I understand your description above
of the Garmin hold function, it sounds like the OBS function on the
King. You must put the unit in OBS mode prior to making a course
reversal for a procedure turn. You then switch back to auto sequence
mode when approaching the FAF.

I haven't yet flown enough with the GPS to feel comfortable using it for
an approach in actual. I'm not flying enough these days to stay
proficient with it and I find that if I don't fly it at least once a
month, I forget the subtleties.

I think a moving map GPS would be the cat's meow, but the 89B style are
terrible, in my opinion. I can go a year between flying an ILS or VOR
approach and still do a credible approach the first time. I just had an
ICC last Friday and I hadn't flown an approach in more than a year. I
was a little rough on the first VOR approach, but the second one was
spot on as were the two ILS I then flew.

The GPS is just not intuitive at all to use and takes way too much
set-up, cross-checking and effort in my opinion. It is amazing how
complicated they made these devices given how simple a typical ILS or
VOR approach is.


Matt