View Full Version : Naples (Italy) R06 VOR

25th Apr 2002, 22:15
Had a few instances (737-EFIS) of this approach being flown offset to the north when raw data indicates on track (057mag). Anyone else?

Check 6
26th Apr 2002, 09:03
We are based at NAP and have never seen this. However, we are not flying with FMS; VOR and GPS driving an HSI. The final should take you near the Capodimonte Museum on the hill.

Next time I make this approach will look for anything unusual.


26th Apr 2002, 09:35
Thanks, Check 6. I've flown this several times in a piece of 'aviation history' with no problems, but we are experiencing SIGNIFICANT shift to the north of track with the IRS/DME driven FMS system (no GPS - PS heard that was a problem in NAP?).

Flew it last Wednesday PM late and instead of looking for the mast at around '9:30' we saw it at around '10:30-11:00'!

No jokes about being 'late' please!

I've heard rumours of a supposed magnetic anomaly around the POM (nothing to do with Sophia Loren!)

Check 6
26th Apr 2002, 11:48
BOAC, you are correct regarding GPS problems. We typically lose our reception right after takeoff, and regain it about 3-5 minutes later. The same happens on arrivals.

I have read there are magnetic anomolies, but have not noticed any.

I should have mentioned before that we do not get the VOR/DME R06 approach often, maybe one out of ten arrivals. I did miss this approach about three weeks ago because of no runway in sight at the MAP. The weather was terrible, with CBs, shifting winds, and ice. After the miss, the wind shifted and vectored for the ILS 24.


26th Apr 2002, 14:57
We're not permitted to fly this approach in LNAV but using raw data VOR/LOC I agree the approach track is offset to the North!
BTW what do you think about the "R24 CAT 1" Hold painted on the taxyway? Is this ICAO standard? Not easy to see at night IMHO :cool:

Check 6
26th Apr 2002, 15:09
BOAC/NIGHTSTOP, for clarification we do not use GPS for the approach.

The CAT I is hard to see, but I believe there is a "stop" sign to the left of the line,

26th Apr 2002, 17:11
Agreed, there is a "Stop" sign and another just before the runway....neither are lit at night from what I recall.
Sorry this is off the thread but does anyone use Aerad or other charts which give ILS/DME check altitudes for R24? Jepp charts only provide altitudes referenced to POM DME, rather inconvenient!

26th Apr 2002, 17:59
Thanks Nightstop - from what I've seen of NAP over the years, badly painted stop-lines are a mere inconvenience in the big picture! Dogs (not 'PAPI's) on the runway, 'flexible' winds and visibilities, etc

We use rawish data too, and your confirmation of the offset is useful. NAP claim to have flight-tested it and found it ok.

Don't think I've seen the DME working reliably, and I use the fix page on LIRN to give real miles to t/d.

27th Apr 2002, 10:40
The GPS problems could be due to the Yanks degrading the signal in that area considering it is the base of the Sixth Fleet. Never been to Naples, but on several outings to Catania (on the doorstep of NAS Sigonella) we invariably lost GPS when coming for the approach.

Check 6
27th Apr 2002, 11:44
We are the Yanks, and we are not degrading GPS coverage.

It is actually very simple - the Italians are operating high power and illegal TV transmitters that interfere with the very small GPS signals. I would suspect harmonics of these stations are in the GPS range in the spectrum.

We do not lose coverage around Catania, only Naples.

:D :D :D

27th Apr 2002, 13:33
Check 6, no offence meant... However, whenever I operated a GPS near Catania (or south-east Sicily for that matter) it always goes berserk. I saw this on two totally distinct aircraft types. Also suffered degradation when using a GPS on a boat in that same area. I thought it had something to do with the big prohibited area around Capo Passerro (sout-east tip of Sicily) but this may be going into chemtrails/x-files territory :)

27th Apr 2002, 16:36
I have the answer to both! Its AFN!:D

27th Apr 2002, 16:53
As in ? :cool:

27th Apr 2002, 17:09

Sorry, 320, a bit of a 'in' joke.

Check 6
27th Apr 2002, 17:10
American Forces Network (Satellite TV and Radio).

29th Apr 2002, 09:43
Funnily enough, I flew into Nap as PNF the other day in a gps equipped A320. PF was using raw data as this approach has not yet been validated for 'managed' use. However, it looked as though the raw data flight path coincided pretty well with the fm picture. Will look again next time.

1st May 2002, 00:57
every time i've flown the 06 procedure i've experienced the same as you...a thought that springs to mind is perhaps the VOR signal is right on the max tolerance of +/- 3deg(or whatever it actually is). Although some may consider it a little unorthodox, I've found that by staying in HDGSEL on the intercept until slightly through the Localiser, and selecting VOR/LOC to pick it up from 1/2 a degree from the southern side results in more satisfactory tracking. Just my humble opinion, but when picking up the Loc from the northern side it does seem like the a/p takes an age to get the Loc bar dead centred, after VOR/LOC is actually annunciated. Maybe the beam is a bit dodge on the northern side? Terrain affecting it?


2nd May 2002, 14:41
Thanks BB. NAP have apparently tested the approach and declared it ok.

Check 6
30th May 2002, 10:26
The Italian government's crack-down on illegal high powered TV stations in Naples must be paying off.

We are not losing our GPS reception at Naples any longer.

:) :) :)

30th May 2002, 11:51
Hey! Check6 - where do we get the porn from now, then?:eek:

Check 6
30th May 2002, 14:41
From French TV??

:D :D :D

Agaricus bisporus
11th Aug 2002, 16:54
Concur. By half a mile or so to the left of extended centreline, and parellel to it throughout the approach. Inertial plot shows this clearly, VHF nav bars centered despite RDMI needles showing several degrees off the QDM.

Tested and found OK? Really?