What are the Necessary IFR Navaid Instruments in 2020???

Windpane

Windpane

Pre-Flight
Joined
Sep 21, 2019
Messages
51
Display Name
Display name:
Windpane
I'm doing a lot of research online, and I'm new BTW. I'm finding lots of new and older material to learn from for free before I start a tab with the pros. Makes me look sharp. o_O

Thing is that I think some of the instruments used and explained in the free online archives are out of use on the planes these days or going out of use. It may be useful to learn how to use them all since who knows what's going to be in every plane or airport, eh.

Which instruments going out of service these days, and what's the absolutely necessary to fly with for approach/depart? Thanks
 
I think you're saying the GPS. Hehe I've been watching videos.
 
DME is going to be the first casualty of the new era. The military is already withdrawing a lot of TACAN stations (which are the TAC part of the VORTAC stations we use). NDBs will likely live for a while but many people have ditched ADFs from their plane in lieu of the IFR GPS already. The traditional VOR and ILS/LOC are still very much in play, though most of the IFR GPS solutions out there also include this.

I've been flying with one IFR GPS/VOR/ILS and one VOR/ILS IFR for almost twenty years and other than adding ADSB capability (which you need for VFR as well), that's the configuration I'll remain with.
 
Yeah, you're doing that for redundancy, I guess. Right?
 
The airports have multiple navaid systems, right? Or is it hit-or-miss out there? Does it just depend on the specific airport and region that one or another navaid system is available?
 
flyingron said:
DME is going to be the first casualty of the new era. The military is already withdrawing a lot of TACAN stations (which are the TAC part of the VORTAC stations we use). NDBs will likely live for a while but many people have ditched ADFs from their plane in lieu of the IFR GPS already. The traditional VOR and ILS/LOC are still very much in play, though most of the IFR GPS solutions out there also include this.

I've been flying with one IFR GPS/VOR/ILS and one VOR/ILS IFR for almost twenty years and other than adding ADSB capability (which you need for VFR as well), that's the configuration I'll remain with.
Click to expand...

DME is going to be around. It’s part of the MON, Minimum Operational Network. There have already been stand alone DME’s commissioned to accommodate DME/DME RNAV where the distance between VORTACs and TACANs is far
 
The reality is the modern airspace system is GPS-based. However, every pilot should be familiar with using ground-based navigation methods, e.g. VOR/ILS, as that is your only backup. And of course for VFR pilots, basic pilotage with a map, which these days is more likely to be electronic than paper. If it's in your plane, why not learn how to use it? NDBs are fun, if rare.

The key is to be able to locate oneself by a variety of means in case your magic magenta line goes to pot. In an emergency, you can even use a COM to navigate if necessary, and you know what to do.
 
To pass your Instrument checkride, you'll need to fly three different types of approaches.

In modern times this typically means: GPS, ILS, VOR. There are variations off of this, but I think it's generally agreed this is the most common combination.

To do this you'll need an IFR-certified GPS Unit, and a VOR receiver with ILS-capability.

This, in addition to the required equipment list for any IFR-certified aircraft. 91.205.
 
Rgbeard said:
To pass your Instrument checkride, you'll need to fly three different types of approaches.

In modern times this typically means: GPS, ILS, VOR. There are variations off of this, but I think it's generally agreed this is the most common combination.

...
Click to expand...

I've heard and read that statement several times from various folks, including a local CFI. In a plane w/out an approved panel GPS navigator, but in a plane only equipped with a single VOR/CDI/GS, wouldn't an ILS, a LOC, and a VOR approach meet the "three different types of approaches" requirement for the checkride and currency? I'm not suggesting that a plane so equipped would be ideal for actual useful IMC flight as VORs are increasingly decommisioned and GPS approaches increasingly become the norm, but couldn't one at least complete the training and checkride for an IR?

Asking for a friend... ;)
 
MuseChaser said:
In a plane w/out an approved panel GPS navigator, but in a plane only equipped with a VOR/GS, wouldn't an ILS, a LOC, and a VOR approach meet the "three different types of approaches" requirement for the checkride and currency?
Click to expand...

My understanding is, technically. No.

The ILS and LOC use the same equipment. As such, it doesn't meet the intention of three different types of approaches. That said, I think the PTS has been updated to address this, and I've heard of many DPE allowing it. I'm not a CFI or CFII, and you should clarify with yours before going too far in the wrong direction.
 
Rgbeard said:
My understanding is, technically. No.

The ILS and LOC use the same equipment. As such, it doesn't meet the intention of three different types of approaches. That said, I think the PTS has been updated to address this, and I've heard of many DPE allowing it. I'm not a CFI or CFII, and you should clarify with yours before going too far in the wrong direction.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply. I'm still in the very early stages learning about IFR, so forgive me if I have some of this wrong.. just trying to learn more, and not being argumentative.

If the requirement is to demonstrate the ability to fly three different types of approaches, rather than anything specific about the equipment requirement to do so, would not an ILS approach demonstrate your ability to track both a localizer and a glide slope until the MAP, a LOC approach demonstrate your ability to track a localizer while identifying the various step-down points along the localizer at which you could descend further to, but not below, the minimum altitude from each fix until reaching the MAP, and a VOR approach would demonstrate your ability to track a VOR and do a circling approach? That seems like three distinctly different approaches. It's entirely possible... and probably likely given my green-ness... that I'm wrong. If so.. why?
 
This is where I stop.

I'm not a CFI/CFII, and I don't feel like downloading/reading the PTS this morning.

Someone else can come along and give a better-informed opinion.
 
I believe the PTS specifies two different non-precision approaches, and at least one precision approach. The test standards also include circling, missed approach and landing from an approach as requirements. A VOR, LOC, and ILS would suffice if you don't have IFR GPS. This is what I did for my checkride: one of these was partial panel, one included a miss, and the other was a circle to land. If you have a certified GPS in the plane the DPE is surely going to use it for one of the approaches. If you have an ADF and a nearby NDB approach, you might get one of those. They are fun!
 
GPS approaches aren't required on a checkride if the aircraft is not equipped. Demonstration of a functioning autopilot is, if the aircraft is so equipped.

Also, why are people saying PTS? The PTS required a DME Arc. The ACS doesn't, and it doesn't require a GPS either.
 
What is:

COM
MAPS
PTS
Arc
ADF
LOC

What are the airports using for navaids to and from? Is it all mixed up depending on which airport and which region? Are some navaid instruments on the plane going to not be in use at some of them while usable at others?
 
MauleSkinner said:
You need a compass and a clock.
Click to expand...

I saw a video of a pilot using navaids and a clock that was in the plane's dashboard panel. He'd calculate a heading and a speed, and then he'd time himself on the clock, changing things after the time ran out.

Is this something like what you are talking about...maybe some all else fails method, or was you joking? Hehe :fingerwag:
 
Windpane said:
What is:

COM
MAPS
PTS
Arc
ADF
LOC

What are the airports using for navaids to and from? Is it all mixed up depending on which airport and which region? Are some navaid instruments on the plane going to not be in use at some of them while usable at others?
Click to expand...

All things you will learn when you start taking actual lessons. And read about in your study materials. And yes, a clock is required for flying IFR. Why will become apparent when you have to do it.
 
You need to shoot a precision approach, without getting into PARs, that means a ILS, not a precision like approach such as a LPV.

Real world training mins, I’d want a plane that met the far mins for IFR and could handle a GPS, ILS and VOR.

Real world IMC mins, all the above but with two navs, two comms, HSI and a two axis autopilot.


Here’s a good free website to get familiar with VORs, ILS, HSI, etc

http://luizmonteiro.com/Learning_VOR_Sim.aspx
 
Windpane said:
I saw a video of a pilot using navaids and a clock that was in the plane's dashboard panel. He'd calculate a heading and a speed, and then he'd time himself on the clock, changing things after the time ran out.

Is this something like what you are talking about...maybe some all else fails method, or was you joking? Hehe :fingerwag:
Click to expand...
Everything’s based on DR...electronic instrumentation is just additional SA.
 
PPC1052 said:
On my IFR check ride, I did a VOR, ILS and LOC. That was acceptable in my case.
Click to expand...

Indeed

“NOTE: An LPV approach with a DA greater than 300 feet HAT may be used as a nonprecision approach; however, due to the precision of its glidepath and localizer (LOC)-like LNAV characteristics, an LPV can be used to demonstrate precision approach proficiency (Area of Operation (AOO) VI Task B) if the DA is equal to or less than 300 feet HAT.”

http://fsims.faa.gov/wdocs/8900.1/v05 airman cert/chapter 02/05_002_009rev1.pdf


So the FAA won’t consider a LPV a precision approach
Same FAA: Well sure you can consider it a precision approach
Lolz
 
James331 said:
So the FAA won’t consider a LPV a precision approach
Same FAA: Well sure you can consider it a precision approach
Click to expand...

That's what I was saying. They just want to fly it all the way down to ILS-like mins. It is unfortunate that the FAA refuses to just call LPV approaches precision, which is what they are.
 
Windpane said:
What is:

COM
MAPS
PTS
Arc
ADF
LOC
Click to expand...

All this is coming, @Windpane!

Almost all of these things you'll learn about at the instrument rating stage. These folks are going all "instrument geek" on ya. :)

Except for "PTS" which is actually an obsolete acronym for the set of standards that a pilot candidate is held to for a checkride (now called ACS, airmen certification standards). And "COM" which just means radio.

If you find yourself reading about "a big change in 2020", it's probably ADS-B, which is a thingy for tracking you in busy urban airspaces. If you live near a city, make sure the plane has it or will have it soon. Nothing else you're reading about is going to suddenly disappear in 2020.

Step 1: find out what plane you'll be training in.
Step 2: find out what navigational stuff that particular plane has installed*
Step 3: learn about that stuff
Step 4: don't worry about the other stuff yet

What you'll learn for your PPL will let you navigate to any airport in the country.

* probably a VOR, and maybe a GPS.
 
Last edited:
Windpane said:
I saw a video of a pilot using navaids and a clock that was in the plane's dashboard panel. He'd calculate a heading and a speed, and then he'd time himself on the clock, changing things after the time ran out.

Is this something like what you are talking about...maybe some all else fails method, or was you joking? Hehe :fingerwag:
Click to expand...

No, this totally a thing. This is called "dead reckoning" and it's one of the navigation skills you'll have to demonstrate to your PPL examiner.

Even if your plane has a GPS, a good instructor will "fail" it periodically to make sure you can still get around the old fashioned way.

Edit: yes, something like this is used in some instrument flying too
 
Last edited:
Rgbeard said:
My understanding is, technically. No.

The ILS and LOC use the same equipment. As such, it doesn't meet the intention of three different types of approaches. That said, I think the PTS has been updated to address this, and I've heard of many DPE allowing it. I'm not a CFI or CFII, and you should clarify with yours before going too far in the wrong direction.
Click to expand...
MuseChaser said:
Thanks for the reply. I'm still in the very early stages learning about IFR, so forgive me if I have some of this wrong.. just trying to learn more, and not being argumentative.
Click to expand...

I have a friend who's doing his instrument checkride this week in his 172 that only has one VOR/loc/gs and radio. His instructor and him met with the DPE to make sure it was ok.
 
BrianNC said:
I have a friend who's doing his instrument checkride this week in his 172 that only has one VOR/loc/gs and radio. His instructor and him met with the DPE to make sure it was ok.
Click to expand...
Very glad to see a couple confirmations that I can, indeed, complete my IR traininf and checkride as-is. Still...actively shopping for an inexpensive-as-possible path to a waas gps panel navigator and second com. A respected fellow PoA member really came through w/ a great deal on adsb compliance..hoping that lightning will strike twice.
 
N1120A said:
That's what I was saying. They just want to fly it all the way down to ILS-like mins. It is unfortunate that the FAA refuses to just call LPV approaches precision, which is what they are.
Click to expand...
It’s not that the FAA refuses to call it a precision approach. LPV doesn’t meet any official (FAA, ICAO, whatever) definition of a precision approach.
 
Windpane said:
I'm new BTW
Click to expand...

If you are new to flying you dont need the instrument part of the forum yet

If you are not new to flying and have an FAA private, you know you need to check out the FAA ACS for the rating of which the instrument can be found here:

https://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/acs/media/instrument_rating_acs_change_1.pdf

Other FAA documents you may find helpful
http://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/supplements/media/instrument_rating_akts.pdf

If you are asking for a crystal ball of what the FAA may do in the future, I cant help you.
 
MuseChaser said:
Very glad to see a couple confirmations that I can, indeed, complete my IR traininf and checkride as-is. Still...actively shopping for an inexpensive-as-possible path to a waas gps panel navigator and second com. A respected fellow PoA member really came through w/ a great deal on adsb compliance..hoping that lightning will strike twice.
Click to expand...

I just took my IFR check ride a month ago in a plane with a VOR, ILS and ADF. No problems whatsoever. We did ILS, VOR and an NDB approaches including one landing, one missed and one circling. The NDB approach wasn't required and we were going to do a LOC but the examiner thought it would be fun since I'd never done one before. :confused:
 
lancie00 said:
The NDB approach wasn't required and we were going to do a LOC but the examiner thought it would be fun since I'd never done one before. :confused:
Click to expand...

They thought it was fun I guess you really do need to know how to use all the functioning equipment in a plane on the checkride.
 
Rgbeard said:
The NDB is about as simple as a box of hammers. Yet so many are spooked by it.

Oh well. It doesn't matter. Mine's coming out next month, anyway.
Click to expand...
Have you tried flying a box-of-hammers approach in a crosswind? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top