Ndb Approaches And Equipment
Coz is says in AIP. ENR 73.3.2. You can only plan to a destination with no navaids by day
3.3 Radio Navigation Aids
3.3.1 A flight which is planned to be conducted under IFR on the last route segment to its destination must provide for a suitable alternate aerodrome, unless
a) for RPT and Charter operations:
3.3.2 Not withstanding the above, a flight may be planned under IFR by day to a destination aerodrome which is not served by a radio nav aid without the requirement to provide for a suitable alternate aerodrome, provided that:1. the destination is served by a radio nav aid .......etc and the aircraft is fitted with two independent and separate radio nav systems; or
2. the destination is served by two radio nav aids .......etc
b) for Aerial Work and Private .......2. the destination is served by two radio nav aids .......etc
a) not more than SCT cloud ........
b) the aircraft can be navigated to the destination ............
Now I interpret that to mean that if I want to plan to an aerodrome without a navaid at night, I must carry an alternate - not that I can't plan the flight, period!b) the aircraft can be navigated to the destination ............
...... but I would be interested to hear from any aviation law specialists out there!
Dr
FTDK,
Sorry, wrong ref. Don't know the AIPs very well! The applicable ref is AIP ENR 1.4.1. In Jepp, it's ATC series 600, also section 1.4.1:
That precludes planning to go there at night.
I agree that Jepp 3.3.2 is a little more lenient, implying that all you need is an alternate.
Sorry, wrong ref. Don't know the AIPs very well! The applicable ref is AIP ENR 1.4.1. In Jepp, it's ATC series 600, also section 1.4.1:
A flight operating under the IFR by day may be planned to a noninstrument procedure destination provided that the aircraft can be
navigated in accordance with ENR 1.1 Section 19.1.
navigated in accordance with ENR 1.1 Section 19.1.
I agree that Jepp 3.3.2 is a little more lenient, implying that all you need is an alternate.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Planet X
Age: 66
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I think NDB's are just fine.
Especially when using the Bendix variable tuning model. Fine peice of machinary that! Vavles and all. And a fixed card to boot....pure heavan.
"Ahh when I were a lad...."
Especially when using the Bendix variable tuning model. Fine peice of machinary that! Vavles and all. And a fixed card to boot....pure heavan.
"Ahh when I were a lad...."
A cockpit photo may tell you and it may not,
For example, the 717 which Peter flies has two ADF selectors. There is only one ADF fitted. You could likewise have two ADF selectors and have NO ADF's fitted. All the selectors do is display the needle on the ND, not select a frequency.
Simple question, why can't you simply answer it?
For example, the 717 which Peter flies has two ADF selectors. There is only one ADF fitted. You could likewise have two ADF selectors and have NO ADF's fitted. All the selectors do is display the needle on the ND, not select a frequency.
Simple question, why can't you simply answer it?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Melbourne,Vic,Australia
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
NDB has the huge advantage of being part of an old crude and robust system. Cheap and liitle calibration involved, unlike VOR.
A solar flare will knock out GPS and a decent one will destroy the satellites. Of course in todays world one at the level of the Carrington event of 1859 would mean you die of thirst/starvation/unrest if the CFIT didn't get you first.
A solar flare will knock out GPS and a decent one will destroy the satellites. Of course in todays world one at the level of the Carrington event of 1859 would mean you die of thirst/starvation/unrest if the CFIT didn't get you first.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NDB
Yeah, I loved the old NDB approaches....especialy when doing an instrument rating renewal and there were two seperate ADF's fitted and each showing different degrees of track error. We had a choice which to choose and always chose the one furtherest away from the examiner (oblique error) or the one closer to holding tolerance. Safety was always the key issue though, not whether you could really chase a constantly fluctuating needle in heavy turb while hanging onto the thing on one engine. There were some "funny" times with ADF's. Especially doing a let down over some remote strip at night, void of ANY ground lighting except those dull rwy edge and end lights, with rain leaking through the screen or door or both, and dripping onto the plate AND the ADF needle continually indicating where the cells were. Breaking out at the minima and knowing that the strip was behind you somewhere. Gee, in reflection its a wonder more of us wern't smokin' holes in the ground. A BIG congrats to the survivors of earlier aviation. Those days are gone so give me the 580's, 480's CX80's etc etc etc with WAAS..........sooo much safer.
Its my understanding that Air Services Aust has a programe in place to shutdown or renew or install NDB's and that there is also a schedule out to check or commission them over the next couple of years in the King Air's.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little trick you can do with the Garmin 430 or probably most GPS's link to a VOR. When selecting the reference point for the GPS (Aerodrome reference point, NDB or VOR ect ect) select the NDB, press the OBS button on the GPS and then tune the OBS on the VOR to the inbound and outbound tracks of the NDB approach! You also need to hit the CDI button to display GPS! Have the ADF dialled up and watch the precise precision of the approach! Follow that CDI and it will operate just like a VOR approach takes the fun away I know but it’s handy to have setup just so you can check yourself!
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Big V
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My first rule of conduct for an NDB approach was to turn the rotating beacon OFF! That seemed the take the 'tick' out of the needles movements.
I did love the Old Tennant Creek Approach, I remember my instrument instructor giving to me and asking how I'd conduct that one. In years to come, I got to do quite a few times.
I did love the Old Tennant Creek Approach, I remember my instrument instructor giving to me and asking how I'd conduct that one. In years to come, I got to do quite a few times.
Bloggs, of course you can plan to a non radio navaid destination at night. That section relates to non instrument procedure destination. Both BME and AYQ have GPS approaches. Furthermore if you had dual TSO 145a or 146a receivers you wouldnt even need an alternate.
Dont you have a decent GPS in your shiny jet?
Dont you have a decent GPS in your shiny jet?
Last edited by desmotronic; 30th Mar 2009 at 01:00.
Desmo,
The issue here is exactly what CASA means by "non-instrument procedure destination". I think you will find that it does not mean that, just because there is a NDB or GPS Approach published, you can plan to go there at night if you are not rated on those approaches. By day, with provision for an alternate (if nec), yes, but not by night.
I made my comment in the context of the original poster enquiring about pilots not being rated on NDBs, and not having GPS NPA approval.
No! One can but live in hope... 
of course you can plan to a non radio navaid destination at night. That section relates to non instrument procedure destination.
I made my comment in the context of the original poster enquiring about pilots not being rated on NDBs, and not having GPS NPA approval.
Dont you have a decent GPS in your shiny jet?
If thats what you meant then the correct reference is AIP ENR 1.5.1.
1.5.1 An aircraft operating under the IFR by night having a MTOW
greater than 5,700KG may only be planned to a destination which
has an approved instrument approach procedure for which the aircraft
is appropriately equipped and the pilot is qualified.
greater than 5,700KG may only be planned to a destination which
has an approved instrument approach procedure for which the aircraft
is appropriately equipped and the pilot is qualified.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Londonish
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Naiieve question (flying below 5700kg and non IFR, private); can one not be IFR en-route (not necessarily IMC), then change to NVFR and visual for the 'arrival' to a non-navaid field, with a navaid alternate?
In my world I can go NVFR to somewhere without a naviad, I just have to have a navaid alternate (presumably in case I can't find plan A...)
In my world I can go NVFR to somewhere without a naviad, I just have to have a navaid alternate (presumably in case I can't find plan A...)
