Make your own approach plates?
 

I was just wondering if a program exists where you can create your own approach plates? Mainly to create departures and arrivals which include various types of instrumental techniques. The only program I have so far managed to find is Final Approach 6, however the shareware version I have seems to crash every 5 minutes.

Many thanks

Clinton Baptiste

... and the reason for possibly contemplating this idea is?

KR

FOK

We used to make up or modify NDB approaches for our students so that they could get some practice flying them. There weren't any around but there were some AM radio stations.
All we did was find a NDB approach at another airport, run it through the copier, white out the things we wanted to change like frequencies, altitudes and headings etc, then run it through the typewriter and bingo, customized approaches.
Make sure you write "for practice or training only" and test fly it to see that it will work.
Good luck

Rather than make a whole new plate an easy way is to augment training is to just pick any NDB approach out the real book of plates plates and add 2000 ft to every altitude with a grease pencil on a plastic cover. Find a convienent AM radio station and go for it. I also tried to enter the approach off a published transition rather than just go straight to the station to make the exercise more realistic. Also I get the student to do a ground briefing where the appraoch used is the end of a complete simulated flight.

Can I download a copy of AM radio station masts? Frequencies.... any good links?
Thanks

Be careful. Very careful.

I Know someone who parked a very expensive aircraft in a tree (not strictly true, the wings were in the tree - the fuselage actually made it to the airfield) flying a self made approach.

He was unhurt, but doesn't fly as he now has no license.

That's why you need to test fly it in day VFR conditions.

Let me be perfectly clear. Under NO circumstances am I advocating actually flying a made up approach in actual IMC or at night. The idea of flying an approach procedure using a commercial broadcast station is simply for convienence during a day VFR instrument training flight with due care taken to keep an adequate lookout. It frankly boggles my mind that anyone would think they need to caution instructors not to do this under real IMC conditions

Also with most airfields around me charging for Instrument approaches it can save the student a fair amount of cash flying the NDB approaches they are most likely to get on test off a local radio station.

Many, many moons ago I learnt the black art of NDB tracking, holding and letdowns using the masts at Droitwich. Always done in VMC with a safety pilot/instructor looking out and with all plate heights plus 1000' so the chance of hitting anything were reduced.

It sounds like it won't just be the computer program that crashes!

Hello!

I am an instructor, not a student's money saver. If his training plan requires NDB approaches to be flown, then I will happily fly NDB approaches with him. Proper, published, official NDB approaches that he can log in his training records. Real world NDB approaches using real world (aeronautical) NDBs down to real world NDB approach minima, often enough in real instrument meteorological conditions. Only this can show him the real world problems of these approaches. Why ecactly they are called "non precision" approaches. And how far away from the runway they take you and how close to the obstacles. If he wants/needs extra practise at lower cost, then we will do it in the procedures trainer.

But under no circumstances will I ever fly a self-made, unapproved approach procedure and under even "less then no" circumstances will I ever teach someone to fly self-made, unapproved procedures. Flying is expensive. Training to fly is even more expensive. For good reasons!

Greetings, Max

Thanks for all your replies and comments.

Basically the idea behind my question was that I wanted to create a difficult approach for the student to perform without having to tell him what to do.
We are lucky enough to have a VOR nearby our airport which we can use for initial training. (Yes I expect the usual comments about procedures like this) Currently I tippex out the stated altitudes and replace them with the relevant altitudes. Before anyone mentions trees! This is not done lightly, I have Jeppview and several maps and calculate accurate descents, plus having the benefit of a g1000 cockpit we have the terrain feature. It is always done in VFR.
All I wanted to do was create more complex approaches featuring all different types of techniques in order to test the student.

Like i said, thanks for the comments.

ClintonBaptiste

Hello !

The easy way is to just take the students money and avoid using any imagination to improve training outcomes.

At my home field I always started the in the airplane NDB approach procedure at a nearby commercial radio station (all done in day ,good VFR conditions ,of course). It was a great spot as it was out of the way of all the regular traffic and you could get 3 times as many approachs done in a lesson as compared to what would be possible at the busy airport that was home base. IMO it was better training for the intial lessons because the student could concentrate on the procedure without being rushed around by ATC. I could also vary the final approach course to give a crosswind. After the student had a go at few of these approaches we would them graduate to the "show" and do the approaches at the airport.

Good morning!

The best training for the initial lessons is a procedures trainer. There is a good reason why our authorites forces all IFR/CPL/ATPL FTOs to buy FNPT II training devices. And why the first 30 (or so, depending on the training scheme) hours of instrument training are flown on such devices. Apart from providing an excellent training environment, they (ours at least) goes at less than half the hourly rate of the cheapest IFR equipped single. So it is not about taking the students money, but about making the most of his money!

And since the procedures trainer has a worldwide database of aerodromes, we can start with simple procedures and move to more and more complicated ones during the training without having to invent anything ourselves.

Regards,
max

You absolutely want to nail down all of the procedures in the sim before you get near the airplane, however there is a reason it is called a "procedures" trainer and not a "accurate repesentation of how the aircraft actually operates" trainer. I find this is especially true for NDB training as the ADF needle actually points at the station in the procedures sim. Great for picking up the theory of NDB tracking not so great for managing all the various real world errors that affect the ADF plus the added pressure of actually flying a real airplane not sitting in a quiet room. Every instructor develops their own style but in my opinion the good ones have an open mind to new ideas.....the less good ones just ridicule anyone who doesn't follow their preconcieved notion of the "right "way to instruct.

Exactly! That's why there is aother 30 hours (or so, depending on the type of course) of real world flying after the basic training in the synthetic training device.
And if I see that a student still has his difficuties then (and if so, it's most likely going to be the NDB approaches and holdings) we go back into the FNPT for an hour. Instead of wasting time and fuel and money doing home-made AM-radio-station approaches. That was my point. Maybe I expressed myself poorly.

Regards, max

what's next

the original poster asks about software not about your personal views on flight training, which are irrelevant to this thread.

you come across as very inflexible and judgmental person who has problems with recognizing any other opinion except of his own.

this is really not appreciated in the modern airline cockpit, so unless you only train ppl and rpl students you (and your students too) would benefit from reconsidering your attitude :8

My answer(s) were not directed at the original poster. As a matter of fact, almost nobody's answers were, at least not regarding his question about software (the answer to wich is simply "JeppView").

Aha. You mean, if I dump all the stupid ballast called "JAR-FCL" and "training syllabus" and go circling overhead radio masts with my students they will stand a better chance of getting a job in a modern airline cockpit? You think I will keep my own job in a transport category aircraft for long, if I start making-up my own approach procedures? Using software downloaded from the internet? Maybe you are right, who knows.

there are many reasons why somebody may want to make own approach plates and if you can only think of "dumping all the stupid ballast called "JAR-FCL" and "training syllabus" that says more about your way of thinking than of the posters

thinking outside of the box and knowing how to do it absolutely safe will for sure increase anybody's chances for getting and keeping an airline job :)

not to mention that practicing an ndb approach at a high altitude gives you an increased margin of safety