On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 14:32:44 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote:


"Roger" wrote


What? You don't do a "roll your own" with the ADF off the local AM
station 10 miles out?

Ahhh, no?

I'm still here, aren't I? g
Hey! Where's your sense of adventure. It sounds as if your IQ is
winning over your sense of adventure. :-))

OTOH I do think it's a good idea to make up and practice such as it
gives some real insight to what the early pioneers had to do. it also
makes you wonder how so many survived.:-)) Then there is that little
"make use of all available resources" just-in-case.

I also wonder what some one who *relies* on GPS would do if their
glass panel failed.

Disclaimer: I am not suggesting or condoning a pilot use their hand
held for approaches.

It is true you need a certified, panel mounted GPS for approaches, but
only having VORs and the old RNAV in the Deb, I've flown simulated
approaches on the hand held that were far more accurate than the VORs
or RNAV. No vertical guidance, but then again I don't have that on the
VORs or RNAV either. That hand held also gives warnings if the number
of satellites is insufficient for accurate navigation.

I have flown NDB approaches in IMC and didn't find them all that
difficult. OTOH they weren't a "roll your own" either:-)) My
Instrument Instructor had me doing NDBs that were 5 miles off the
field right down to minimums. Time he got me to that point I never
blew one. These were in actual, and very close to minimums with the
published missed and hold. I also had to do all the talking as we had
reached the point were I was supposed to treat him like a passenger
who was just watching to see how I'd do.

One such was at Alma Michigan (AMN) where the ceiling was just feet
above legal with heavy rain, yet the hold was skimming the tops
(through the occasional one sticking up) that left you with an
unbelievable feeling of speed. Kinda like a go-cart at 70 MPH except
we were doing 120. That is so distracting it really makes following
the gages difficult.:-)) It's also amazing, at least to me, how that
much rain could be squeezed out of such a thin layer of clouds. Of
course I've seen the reverse where I descended into torrential rain at
7000 wondering "how am I going to see to land" and found only light
rain 5500 to 6000 feet lower.

BUT back to the original thread. Even if ATC was reporting 100 which
is well below minimums, I have found that doesn't necessarily mean the
particular field is socked in. It might and I emphasize the might be
well above minimums at that field. As I mentioned in an earlier post,
I flew the VOR-A into our airport when conditions were reported
between 100 and 200 with less than a mile, yet found 600 and 2 to 3
for visibility.

BTW Well before I took the check-ride weather was not a reason to
cancel a lesson unless it would have been unsafe such as ice or
thunderstorms.
We had some pretty rough rides, but most were far smoother than flying
simulated on a sunshiny day.

Roger (K8RI) I wish I were that proficient now.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com