IRA Checkride with single VOR/GS

midlifeflyer said:
I don't recall that language in the defunct PTS, but that's just me - no need to look at the question before. But I don't see it in the current ACS testing standards.
Click to expand...

Silly me, I clicked the link in the post before mine thinking it was the current edition. :eek:
 
dmspilot said:
But it also says "If the equipment allows, at least one nonprecision approach shall be conducted without vertical guidance."

He then has two excuses allowing him to do an ILS as LOC-only: one, his equipment doesn't allow it; and two, he only needs to do one of the two NPAs without vertical guidance anyway. He can do one NPA without vertical guidance in the form of a VOR approach.
Click to expand...

Since you have to use two different types of navigational aids for the two required nonprecision approaches, your only choices are VOR and LOC. Notwithstanding the strict definitions of the ACS, whether or not the DPE will allow an ILS approach to be counted as a nonprecision approach by ignoring the GS indications will be up to him. I would check with the DPE before embarking on this route.
 
sarangan said:
Since you have to use two different types of navigational aids for the two required nonprecision approaches, your only choices are VOR and LOC. Notwithstanding the strict definitions of the ACS, whether or not the DPE will allow an ILS approach to be counted as a nonprecision approach by ignoring the GS indications will be up to him. I would check with the DPE before embarking on this route.
Click to expand...
I would definitely check with the DPE. In my case, the DPE was adamant I could not do the localizer approach as the non-precision because both CDI’s had a glide slope. The localizer only would have been a “dive & drive” and obvious I was not using the glide slope but he said it was not permitted. It wasn’t a big deal - I did a RNAV approach instead. It doesn’t sound like the OP has another option. It is best to check with the local DPE.
 
Jim_CAK said:
I would definitely check with the DPE. In my case, the DPE was adamant I could not do the localizer approach as the non-precision because both CDI’s had a glide slope. The localizer only would have been a “dive & drive” and obvious I was not using the glide slope but he said it was not permitted. It wasn’t a big deal - I did a RNAV approach instead. It doesn’t sound like the OP has another option. It is best to check with the local DPE.
Click to expand...
Technically, you did a VOR approach instead. ;)

I think even 15 years ago, if you had GPS approach capability, it was required.
 
Yes, it can be done, and often was before GPS.

Years ago, I was an Army helo pilot. Did my IFR ride in the helicopter with a single Nav receiver and NDB, no DME or GPS. Holding over an airway intersection with a single VOR, Localizer approach with step downs, NDB approach, 0/0 instrument take off, the works and all without an autopilot. The ILS was the easy part. Now THAT was a busy check ride! I was much younger then, wouldn’t want to do it today.

As others have said, the trick is finding the right instructor and the right DPE. I think one would have to find “old school” types to get it done. I would remove the portable mounted in the panel so as to force you to learn the “old school” way AND to prevent you from using an unapproved device for navigation on the checkride.
 
Last edited:
Single VOR with GS will be tough but definitely doable. I'm training now with 2 VOR's, 1 with GS, and ADF and an audio panel which picks up the outer marker. No DME or GPS and it's not a problem. For training we use an iPad to learn how to do DME arcs and RNAV approaches. Obviously you can't use it in the soup but you can for training.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I don't know. With a modern GPS, we can turn off LPV so we don't get a glidepath. AFAIK, cannot do that with a VOR/LOC indicator. Whether pretending to ignore the needle in front of you is acceptable or not, I don't know. Never had a reason to check.
Click to expand...

Sure you can do it, as long as the approach is published as LOC approach, you just fly the step downs, and assuming its a timed approach, start your time and go missed at the appropriate time. Doesn't matter (or at least shouldn't) if you fly the glide slope even, as long as you don't bust the LOC altitude minimums. They are pushing us away from the "dive and drive" procedure anyway and want you to calculate a descent rate that would get you to MDA in time from the FAF anyway. On my check ride, I used the same indicator and NAV/COM for the LOC as I did for the ILS approach. I did employ the dive and drive method and didn't even really think about what the GS needle was doing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top