Fixed Card ADF
 

G'day,

I started my IREX this morning and I'm wondering how common the fixed card ADF is these days?

A day of studying intercepts and tracking on fixed card after a career of using RMI's - I'm left wondering whether fixed card ADFs are still going strong in light GA twins or becoming a thing if the past?

Adf
 

Mine doesn't have one. The ADF displays on the G500 HSI, so it acts like an RMI.

I couldn't tell you the last time I flew an NDB approach, whether for practice or in anger!?

But they are still out there in some of the older and 'working' planes.

21 years in GA this year and the only RMI I have ever seen was in the Duchess I did my initial CIR in.

NDB approaches a weekly event. :bored:

They are still the norm in GA piston twins. I've flown one piston twin that had a RMI. Fixed card in everything else, and true to GA form (and ADF/NDB form), varying degrees of randomness in every relative bearing I've seen. Although illegal as hell, it's probably safer shooting a NPA off an iPhone than an ADF/NDB alone these days.

Conversely, never flown a turboprop without an RMI.

Yes, still unbelievably the backbone of IFR in Australian GA and unlikely to change, as indeed is the whole clapped out 70's and a few 80's fleet. Its just a reflection of the lack of investment and conservative attitudes in the industry. People come and go, companies come and go, regulators come and go but we"re still basically flying the same old planes with the same old equipment we've had for decades.

Agreed especially as far as twins are concerned. Though with the advent of Aspen and the likes the cost of "glass" is very comparable to repairing/replacing old style HSI's, RMI's etc with their steam driven remote gyros. So you are seeing some older aircraft being retrofitted.

However the real problem is finding suitable replacement piston twins. While turbines are suitable in many instances there is still a place for piston twins. Hence one reason the fleet of old aircraft.

One other issue is being able to operate at a price to make a buck that allows improvements and upgrades. There's too many who think they can operate aircraft at rates that don't reflect to true cost of operation and cut their throat and everyone else's at the same time.

While not directly related here's an example of what I mean. There's one hero (one who has already lost a a lot of other peoples money in aviation) in the news recently importing and selling a LSA. Apparently it only costs about $50 per hour to run and will change the way pilots are trained and be the choice of recreational pilots. My very conservative estimates based on 200 hours utilisation, presuming you will insure and hangar it, is $115 per hour at the very least.

No wonder when we have idiots promoting ideas like this that we still have old fixed card ADF's and other such fantastic gear, as many do not charge what they should to operate their aircraft.

Based on my experience, $50/hour wet *direct* running cost is normal for an LSA.

Regardless of type, if you can't get at least 500 hours a year on a training aircraft, it's not worth having it online. It'll probably cost you back $75/hour wet.

if you add $30/hour to finance it you might have a free aircraft in 10 years.

Now to run it as a business ... I guess you need plenty of aircraft doing 1000+/year each to make it viable!

In short: a good LSA is a good training option, but it certainly won't revolutionise anything with incredible low cost. Still, getting a $25/hour advantage with your new LSAs compared to the guy with a 30 year old 172 and 40 year old 152 may well mean people walk through your door instead of his.

(Or not, because someone PPRuNe told them prospective employers want you to have "Cessna time" and "they won't look at you if you did your ab-initio in an ultralight".)

We're getting off topic a bit, I think you missed my point which is many do not know the true costs of operation or choose to ignore the facts.

By direct do you mean just fuel and the costs of the 50 hour inspections?
Because that's about all 50 bucks gets you. No insurance, no reserve to overhaul engine, no hangar etc etc. In other words the true costs are much higher.

My figures were based on private ownership/usage and for that 200 hours is probably a very generous figure.

Agree re the 500 hours for a flying school situation, but then there needs to other costs added to the equation in order for the school to make money.

The opposite for me, I haven't seen a fixed card ADF in any 'IFR twin' I have ever flown. I can't remember the last time I did an NDB in anger, yet have flown multiple aproaches (of every other type) to the minima in the last month or so.

Fast approaching 30 years in GA for me. The funny thing is, I still see and hear all the aircraft I got my milestones in (1st solo, PPL, CPL, IRT, 1st charter job, etc...), still getting around. :eek:

16 liters unleaded 98 = $24
$10 overhaul allowance ($20K by the time you hit 2000 hours)
$16 left for services, or $1600 per 100 hours.

My average 100 hourly is $550. A 50 hourly is basically an intensive daily inspection in a Rotax powered LSA, no need to even change oil.

So assuming $50 leaves a lot of money in the kitty for if parts do fail and need replacing. Or the 800 hour gear box overhaul. And parts aren't neatly as expensive as in certified aircraft.

Adding insurance ($2500) and hangar ($300/month?) take it the total hourly up to $75. Assuming 500 hours.

More if you are unlucky with parts needing replacement, but not as much as you think.

And these are the figures I get from many LSA owners, including schools. Unless they are all deluding themselves, I am going with these numbers!

Adelaide Soaring Club has run a bunch of Jabiru 160/170 (which they run on expensive AVGAS!) for years at $100/hour with volunteer instructors. They certainly wouldn't survive if the actual cost was more than that!

Fixed card ADF is dangerous in this day & age. I would never fly one. Ever. No reason to have one other than on a historical aircraft.

Put it on an HSI or RMI with moving compass and you have an approach that is 100x safer.

Not sure why everybody hates GPS so much. It's accurate, reliable and cheap(ish). Near ILS minimas to nearly every airport.

Edit: yes by near-ILS, I mean lined up with the runway at decent minimas (Yes I know they are a couple of hundred feet higher)

Baswell,

Our figures are very similar when the utlisation is factored in. I'm working on what it will cost a private owner at 200 hours per year ~ $120/hour. 200 hours utilisation for a private owner is a lot, probably more like 100 hours ~ 180/hour.

For 500 hours ~ 83/hour. Utilisation is the key!!!!!!!!

The main difference in our figures being the price of fuel, mogas will set you back $33/her over here. Also I suspect many use avgas as on field availability of mogas is pretty poor.

Why the need for two ADF's?

With modern screens it is very easy to use the GPS bearing pointer to back up the ADF. What are the DO and DON'Ts you refer to?

When mine was a Parafield, I just had a 200 litre drum on a 6x4 trailer with hand pump. Only my aircraft was using it, so no need to meter.

A friend just built this rig, soon to be commissioned at Gawler:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.n...40547220_n.jpg

If you run your own school or club, certainly not expensive to do. I think this has about $2500 spent on it.

More and more RA-friendly fields are seeing the light, the major issue being the AVGAS bowser is usually owned and operated by a 3rd party fuel supplier. Many clubs and schools need to get over the fear of taking on the task of being a fuel merchant themselves. Even if you barely break even, there should be plenty of flow-on business.

Build it and they will come! :ok:

While we might like to think they should be they are certainly not a thing of the past.

Look at it this way with your training, if you can get your head around using the fixed card ADF, then RMI's and EHSI's with ADF bearing pointers will be a piece of cake.

Shagpile,

Fixed cards are NOT dangerous, the utrained and unaware use of them may be, but, they gave you a great understading of your spot in space
RMIs, HSIs and glass cockpits are all the go these days, but after many years of training on glass and non glass, I find the current reliance on glass to not always be in the best interets of good overall SA.
Auto dependence is the current danger for a lot of us.

:ok:

Canada, like Australia, had only NDB approaches at most airports until very recently.

Thankfully Transport Canada (CAA equivalent) has finally started getting serious about commissioning GPS approaches at all instrument airports.

I started carrying a handheld GPS in the early 1990's and now all the aircraft I fly have proper IFR GPS units fitted. As near as I can figure the last time I flew a for real IMC NDB approach without some sort of GPS track guidance, even if it was only the handheld, was 1994 :ok:

Now of course if I was using a handheld the primary nav instrument was the ADF but amazingly after 1994 the aircraft track was always very closely aligned with the centerline of the runway when I broke out on the "NDB" approach :cool:

Before that the runway was anywhere from 10 to 2 O'Clock when I got visual. I guess I must have suddenly got a lot better at NDB approaches in 1994 ;)

The spanking brand new twin turbine I fly which has Proline 21 G2+ also has an ADF with the needles on the screen, and I used it to hand-fly a for-real NDB approach a few weeks back. Yep, it is old tech but it still provides one of the best SA aids in the game; the needle always points to the aid. Very handy when all the gee-whizery falls on its computer-driven @rse. Plus, its a good practice of the basic manual skills of instrument flying - scan, mental mathematics, multitasking... all those things that get rusty from over-dependence on the magenta line. I personally consider that issue to be way more 'dangerous' than flying an occasional non-precision radio aid approach. I get a buzz from accurately handflying an NDB, VOR or ILS. Get your kicks where you can!

Shag,
I'm with greybeard.
Why any more dangerous in this day and age than the past? NDB approaches have got plenty of fat on them for that reason. Any IFR pilot should be able to orient themselves with a basic ADF. Only dangerous if the pilot is methinks.

I remember an old timer telling me back in the day, his buds thought he was a wimp flying an NDB approach instead of using the radio range. After all "real" pilots navigated listening to the dots and dashes not taking the "easy" way out and following the needle. His response was the NDB was better and easier to use so why not take advantage of the technology.

The NDB was the best pilots had 30 years ago but technology has moved on. I sure don't miss those NDB letdowns in the British Columbia mountains with higher terrain in all quadrants.....

Anybody who is flying a for real instrument approach to minimums and is not using the best most accurate nav aids available (GPS over ADF in the context of this argument) is IMO being irresponsible. I did a lot of flying in the pre GPS days and still use the needle as a situational aid, but when it comes with the job of aligning the airplane with the runway on the final approach track I know where I am primarily looking and it sure is not the wobbly ADF needle :ugh: