ILS and the Garmin 430W

Ventucky Red

Ventucky Red

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
2,179
Display Name
Display name:
Jon
Ok... so once you press the CDI button and switch over to VLOC and VLOC indicator is lit then the GPS is acting like it is a navcomm and the needles are getting their information from the transmission of the airports LOC/GS and there is no need to load an approach if you want to fly the approach old skul - correct?
 
I believe that is correct provided there are no caveats for the particular approach. You will need to be prepared to fly the missed approach etc without using the GPS of course.
 
Ventucky Red said:
Ok... so once you press the CDI button and switch over to VLOC and VLOC indicator is lit then the GPS is acting like it is a navcomm and the needles are getting their information from the transmission of the airports LOC/GS and there is no need to load an approach if you want to fly the approach old skul - correct?
Click to expand...

Yes you can do that, but if the approach calls for a DME fix (and you don't have a regular DME), then you better have the GPS loaded up with the approach.
 
Ventucky Red said:
Ok... so once you press the CDI button and switch over to VLOC and VLOC indicator is lit then the GPS is acting like it is a navcomm and the needles are getting their information from the transmission of the airports LOC/GS and there is no need to load an approach if you want to fly the approach old skul - correct?
Click to expand...

Its not "acting like" a navcom, it is a navcom. There's also not an "oldschool/newschool" way to fly an ILS. There's only one way.
 
Ventucky Red said:
Ok... so once you press the CDI button and switch over to VLOC and VLOC indicator is lit then the GPS is acting like it is a navcomm and the needles are getting their information from the transmission of the airports LOC/GS and there is no need to load an approach if you want to fly the approach old skul - correct?
Click to expand...
Correct. Adding a "But" or two to @sarangan's

  • If you are going to do the full approach or may be given "direct" so one waypoint on the approach, GPS guidance is the easiest way. No real reason to forgo the increased situational awareness.
  • If the ILS approach has an RNAV TAA (many do and more will), it will be "GPS Required) so you need to load it anyway.
  • If you are going to do the published missed, again GPS guidance is the easiest way. So that means loading the approach and being sure it sequences with you.
  • Not just a GPS thing... If you have two sources of navigation information, it's good practice to use both to back up each other.
  • Creating the habit of loading the approach will give a lot of practice and muscle memory which will be valuable.
 
Thanks all... question answered... I had an issue with a glide-slope when doing a practice approach I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything with the Garmin magic box..


RingLaserGyroSandwich said:
I believe that is correct provided there are no caveats for the particular approach. You will need to be prepared to fly the missed approach etc without using the GPS of course.
Click to expand...

You mean like the way I was trained to do it with VOR radials and Morris code identifying? ;)
 
sarangan said:
Yes you can do that, but if the approach calls for a DME fix (and you don't have a regular DME), then you better have the GPS loaded up with the approach.
Click to expand...
Not that there is any logical reason not to load the Approach, but you wouldn’t need to do it. You could just put in the DME station in as next fix and read the distance to numbers.
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
Correct. Adding a "But" or two to @sarangan's

  • If you are going to do the full approach or may be given "direct" so one waypoint on the approach, GPS guidance is the easiest way. No real reason to forgo the increased situational awareness.
  • If the ILS approach has an RNAV TAA (many do and more will), it will be "GPS Required) so you need to load it anyway.
  • If you are going to do the published missed, again GPS guidance is the easiest way. So that means loading the approach and being sure it sequences with you.
  • Not just a GPS thing... If you have two sources of navigation information, it's good practice to use both to back up each other.
  • Creating the habit of loading the approach will give a lot of practice and muscle memory which will be valuable.
Click to expand...
Just a little nit-picky thing. I don’t think TAA’s are being used to construct new Approaches any more. But yeah, more and more shall we call them ‘hybrid’ Approaches are being made. RNAV segments leading up to a VHF Final Approach Segment.

EDIT: I thought wrong. Read on to @RussR ’s post #11. They’re still building TAA’s
 
Last edited:
luvflyin said:
Just a little nit-picky thing. I don’t think TAA’s are being used to construct new Approaches any more.
Click to expand...

TAA's are very much still being used in new RNAV (and sometimes ILS) procedures. In some areas of the country, ATC doesn't like them so you don't see them, but in others you do.
 
luvflyin said:
Not that there is any logical reason not to load the Approach, but you wouldn’t need to do it. You could just put in the DME station in as next fix and read the distance to numbers.
Click to expand...

Except that it’s alot of pilot workload at an intense time, and likely to mis-read or have the wrong fix. The time when you are going missed is the absolute wrong time to be twisting dials and changing GPS to get distance to a fix. Having the approach loaded also makes the GPS flash the screen and count-down a few seconds to get your attention, when you are passing a fix.

seriously, I failed an IFR checkride doing this: was flying a VOR approach and using my 430w displaying distance from VOR to get the step-down fixes. It all went sideways , I got overloaded and I overflew the missed approach point and descended towards terrain before my examiner cut it off. Seriously if I did that junk in actual IMC I woulda crashed.

Examiner and my CFI both said “you’ve got a IFR GPS, why didn’t you load the approach so you could see the waypoints ?” I Did a re-test later and passed by doing just that.
We have better tools in our cockpits now, no reason to make IFR flying any harder than it needs to be, maybe in Practice with a CFI I’d read distance off the page, but in real life: fatigued after a long flight and screaming kids in the back, I’m going to make it as easy and I can on myself.
 
Last edited:
ChopAndDrop said:
seriously, I failed an IFR checkride doing this: was flying a VOR approach and using my 430w displaying distance from VOR to get the step-down fixes. It all went sideways , I got overloaded and I overflew the missed approach point and descended towards terrain before my examiner cut it off. Seriously if I did that junk in actual IMC I woulda crashed.

Examiner and my CFI both said “you’ve got a IFR GPS, why didn’t you load the approach so you could see the waypoints ?” I Did a re-test later and passed by doing just that.
Click to expand...
All true. But consider: when are you actually likely to fly a VOR approach? Checkrides, IPCs, and practice aside I'd say it is during a GPS outage. System or equipment based. So despite rules saying you can use GPS, I think the most realistic practice scenario is to do it completely old school. ILS is different.
 
ChopAndDrop said:
Except that it’s alot of pilot workload at an intense time, and likely to mis-read or have the wrong fix. The time when you are going missed is the absolute wrong time to be twisting dials and changing GPS to get distance to a fix. Having the approach loaded also makes the GPS flash the screen and count-down a few seconds to get your attention, when you are passing a fix.

seriously, I failed an IFR checkride doing this: was flying a VOR approach and using my 430w displaying distance from VOR to get the step-down fixes. It all went sideways , I got overloaded and I overflew the missed approach point and descended towards terrain before my examiner cut it off. Seriously if I did that junk in actual IMC I woulda crashed.

Examiner and my CFI both said “you’ve got a IFR GPS, why didn’t you load the approach so you could see the waypoints ?” I Did a re-test later and passed by doing just that.
We have better tools in our cockpits now, no reason to make IFR flying any harder than it needs to be, maybe in Practice with a CFI I’d read distance off the page, but in real life: fatigued after a long flight and screaming kids in the back, I’m going to make it as easy and I can on myself.
Click to expand...
Yeah, like I said, no logical reason not to load the Approach.
 
RussR said:
TAA's are very much still being used in new RNAV (and sometimes ILS) procedures. In some areas of the country, ATC doesn't like them so you don't see them, but in others you do.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info. Editing my post.
 
when are you actually likely to fly a VOR approach?…. I'd say it is during a GPS outage
Click to expand...

for my plane, I cannot, because I don’t have DME and all the VOR approaches near me say DME or GPS required to know the fixes. and most of the ILS procedures have at-least one fix that needs DME to identify, also.

But that’s a good thought exercise, if I may go on the tangent:
In an actual GPS-outage scenario (1), I would ask ATC for a radar vectors / radar assisted approach, or otherwise need radar coverage and ATC help for when I pass certain waypoints (not having DME equipment).
My home airport just happens to be part of the MON, so I could navigate to the nearby VOR then get vectored onto the ILS. I could fly the ILS (without GPS).
except that in the missed-approach procedure there’s a fix/hold that requires DME, but hey that’ll be the least of my problems.


Footnotes 1: keep in mind a “GPS Outage” doesn’t necessarily mean a system wide catastrophe, it could more likely be an equipment failure of my 430w which is my one and only IFR certified GPS (eg smartphone with ForeFlight doesn’t count for this).

this has actually been a good discussion to inspire thought and “what if” planning, I’m learning some new things.
 
So, another question pops up...

Skip it... found the answer...
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
All true. But consider: when are you actually likely to fly a VOR approach? Checkrides, IPCs, and practice aside I'd say it is during a GPS outage. System or equipment based. So despite rules saying you can use GPS, I think the most realistic practice scenario is to do it completely old school. ILS is different.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If there is an LPV approach and you have a 430W, there is no reason today to fly a VOR or NDB approach. If you want to do it for practice, do it the way it was originally conceived.
But why do you say ILS is different (other than due to the technical definition of precision approach)?
 
Rgbeard said:
+10 pts for the most imaginative spelling of Morse I've seen in this context.
Click to expand...
th



But seriously - I guess you can forego the GPS and just fly the ILS radio beams, but planes with DME's are few and far between, and getting fewer - as are VOR towers, down to the MON. Love it or hate it, in all practicality GPS is needed for finding the fixes.
 
sarangan said:
Exactly. If there is an LPV approach and you have a 430W, there is no reason today to fly a VOR or NDB approach. If you want to do it for practice, do it the way it was originally conceived.
But why do you say ILS is different (other than due to the technical definition of precision approach)?
Click to expand...
Because I think it's still a reasonable choice to fly an ILS, snd many still do, using GPS to get there and for the missed, so I put it in a different category.
 
WDD said:
th



But seriously - I guess you can forego the GPS and just fly the ILS radio beams, but planes with DME's are few and far between, and getting fewer - as are VOR towers, down to the MON. Love it or hate it, in all practicality GPS is needed for finding the fixes.
Click to expand...
Yeah, a lot of the bug smasher crowd probably don't have DME. But DME is an integral part of the MON program. That's why we are starting to see more 'standalone' DME's. When a VORTAC or VOR/DME is decommissioned, some times the DME is left on the air. DME/DME/IRU RNAV's become a navigation source when GPS bites the dust.
 
Last edited:
A transmitter might still be sending a DME signal, but few planes have a traditional DME instrument anymore. The DME function is handled by the GPS unit. I have an instrument rating - and can tell you that in my 250 hours I’ve never flown a plane with a DME nor could I tell how to work one.

How does a non DME instrumented plane use the MON if we loos GPS? I don’t know.
 
WDD said:
How does a non DME instrumented plane use the MON if we loos GPS? I don’t know.
Click to expand...
FAA says you don't need DME to begin an approach from the MON.
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_or...service_units/techops/navservices/gbng/vormon
The VOR MON is designed to enable aircraft, having lost GPS service, to revert to conventional navigation procedures. This will allow users to continue through the outage area using VOR station-to-station navigation or to proceed to a MON airport where an Instrument Landing System (ILS), Localizer (LOC) or VOR approach procedure can be flown without the necessity of GPS, Distance Measuring Equipment (DME), Automatic Direction Finder (ADF), or surveillance. Any airport with a suitable instrument approach may be used for landing, but the VOR MON assures that at least one airport will be within 100 Nautical Miles (NM).
Click to expand...
 
BTW - read the latest IFR Newsletter. They're keeping the number of ILS approaches the same, but there was some discussion of starting to reduce / MON those as well. Many are apparently beyond their service life and expensive to maintain, just like the older VOR towers that have been decommissioned.
 
sarangan said:
Yes you can do that, but if the approach calls for a DME fix (and you don't have a regular DME), then you better have the GPS loaded up with the approach.
Click to expand...

I believe once the ILS frequency is loaded in and you press the CDI button, you are flying the ILS on the indicator. You can still load the GPS approach, or select Direct to the airport, and read the distances on the 430 display itself. Either on the map page or Flightplan page, if you entered the destination airport in the flight plan.
 
WDD said:
Understand that you can fly from VOR tower to VOR tower, but I was asking about flying the approach, not getting to the start of one.

Assume the airport doesn't have ILS or LOC (many don't). Timed step downs from a known fix (like a VOR tower)? I guess it's possible -
Click to expand...

VOR MON airports are "protected" in that they are supposed to have at least one ILS or VOR approach that does not require DME.

For example, BTP outside Pittsburgh is a designated MON airport and has an ILS OR LOC RWY 8 that does not require DME, ADF, GPS, Radar, etc. All fixes are VOR intersections, etc.

Likewise, EVV, Evansville, IN is also a MON airport. The VOR approach there requires RADAR or DME. But both ILSes can be flown with only VOR and ILS.
 
WDD said:
Understand that you can fly from VOR tower to VOR tower, but I was asking about flying the approach, not getting to the start of one.

Assume the airport doesn't have ILS or LOC (many don't). Timed step downs from a known fix (like a VOR tower)? I guess it's possible -
Click to expand...
I think you need to reference an actual approach where what you are concerned about might happen. I don't think I've ever seen an approach with "timed stepdowns" (as opposed to DME or intersections) and wonder whether there even is such a thing (@RussR?). "Possible" issues we imagine might or might not have a basis in reality.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I think you need to reference an actual approach where what you are concerned about might happen. I don't think I've ever seen an approach with "timed stepdowns" (as opposed to DME or intersections) and wonder whether there even is such a thing (@RussR?). "Possible" issues we imagine might or might not have a basis in reality.
Click to expand...

RussR has the answer in his post.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I think you need to reference an actual approach where what you are concerned about might happen. I don't think I've ever seen an approach with "timed stepdowns" (as opposed to DME or intersections) and wonder whether there even is such a thing (@RussR?). "Possible" issues we imagine might or might not have a basis in reality.
Click to expand...

Timed stepdowns are not a thing in U.S. TERPS.
 
RussR said:
Timed stepdowns are not a thing in U.S. TERPS.
Click to expand...
Was spitballing on how to possibly do an approach without DME or GPS. You answered the question- a MIN VOR will have an approach such as ILS that you can fly when you get there by deign.
 
WDD said:
but I was asking about flying the approach, not getting to the start of one.
Click to expand...
OK, let's try this with a bit of highlighting and editing:

This will allow users to... proceed to a MON airport where an Instrument Landing System (ILS), Localizer (LOC) or VOR approach procedure can be flown without the necessity of GPS, Distance Measuring Equipment (DME), Automatic Direction Finder (ADF), or surveillance.
 
asicer said:
OK, let's try this with a bit of highlighting and editing:

This will allow users to... proceed to a MON airport where an Instrument Landing System (ILS), Localizer (LOC) or VOR approach procedure can be flown without the necessity of GPS, Distance Measuring Equipment (DME), Automatic Direction Finder (ADF), or surveillance.
Click to expand...
If you think about it, it's the only way that makes any sense.
 
Rcmutz said:
I believe once the ILS frequency is loaded in and you press the CDI button, you are flying the ILS on the indicator. You can still load the GPS approach, or select Direct to the airport, and read the distances on the 430 display itself. Either on the map page or Flightplan page, if you entered the destination airport in the flight plan.
Click to expand...
One advantage of loading the approach in the GPS side in addition to setting the ILS frequency is that it allows you to see when you have reached named fixes, which is a lot easier than watching for specific distances, especially if it's an approach with a lot of stepdowns, such as the Moffet ILS (INUQ).

One limitation of that method is that older models of GPS may not have enough memory to display every stepdown. I have even seen that happen on an LNAV approach on the KLN94, for example. (Whether that problem occurs on a 430W, I don't know.)
 

Attachments

  • NUQ 00410IL32R.PDF
    415.9 KB · Views: 2
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top