ADF required for IR(R) and IFR?
 

Hi

I am thinking of going down the CB-IR route and one option is to get a share in an aircraft. I could then do my IR(R) training in it and use it to fly IFR to build the hours before doing the E-IR test (I take it that's the correct way for the CB-IR? I'm still confused about this one).

I have seen a nice PA28 and it has everything except an ADF. Is this a requirement for what I am planning?

Any other pointers or experiences with the CB-IR would be welcome also.

Happy new year!

ADF is a tricky issue nowadays. In reality it is outdated and almost completely useless, but there are quite some procedures in Europe where you need to have one - at worst only for MAP ... similar is true for DME. Lets keep fingers crossed that CAA&EASA finally start to accept GPS in lieu of ADF and DME, as many other already do.

For now, I see ADF and DME as mandatory for training, but that may change any day. Hope dies last.

No is the answer. ADF cannot be mandatory for IFR as it is not now mandated for carriage in those conditions.
Officially you are of course restricted to Approaches and Holds not requiring an ADF.
In the real IFR world for ADF procedures, you would select the radio aid from your GPS database, and use the OBS facility to select and fly the inbound Course of the Hold or Letdown on your CDI or map display. . Much easier and of course safer than the wandering ADF needle.
Re DME the slant range errors vs GPS are negligible during an approach,as the FAA have long mandated, and thousands of FAA IR pilots accept and safely use daily.

@cessnapete: you are perfectly right for the FAA, but Europe is a different animal. There are so many odd things, last I saw was mandatory DME even when never used as requirement to enter local airspace under IFR (no idea how in the world this can ever be enforced), when flying around and it is only slowly turning towards the FAA light at the end of the tunnel. Yes, in reality you do use the GPS, but may have to carry the dead load equipment anyways.

Chickenhouse
 

The CAA is not going to "see the light " as you put it about replacing DME with GPS distance as long as there are multiple identical ident for radio aids closely placed in Europe.

The USA & Canada don't have his problem so GPS distance substitution for DME is safe, in Europe it is an invitation to fly into the side of a hill.

With the proposal to add a GTN 650 to the PA28 I fly (YES PLEASE A and C) I've been looking at the approaches for places I have been into recently in IMC. I was a bit surprised to see how common it is after a GPS RNAV approach to find the missed approach is a climb to an NDB (Shoreham, for example...)

How many people actually fly that is another matter...

Exactly what I meant, you don't need it necessarily, you don't use it, but if you don't carry the equipment you don't need or use, it was illegal to fly. How many never recognize and what happens if you receive a ramp check treatment after landing?

Don't worry Tim, the ADF & DME stays ! We don't cheapskate on IFR kit.

If you buy a factory new Cirrus or Diamond aircraft, needless to say - IFR certified, there is no DME and no ADF installed. Even in Europe.

Avionimc
 

What is the use of an IFR Cirrus or Diamond that is not capable of flying 70% of IFR approaches in Europe.

DME is essential in Europe, ADF is optional but very useful.

( I suspect that most European IFR Diamonds have both DME & ADF both via remote boxes ).

I imagine they just get on with it and no-one really cares.

I am told it is impossible to order a Boeing 787 or the new 737 Max with an ADF. None has ever been or ever will be certified on those aircraft. so how are they flying IFR in EU airspace ? The debate is already over and it is inevitable that GA is going to get pulled into the 21 st century, no matter how much kicking and screaming comes from the Luddites

The ADF is ancient unreliable technology that IMO should be banned as unsafe.

Not sure how many airfields in Europe that can take a 737, let alone a 787, have an NDB approach with no alternative RNAV approach to the same runway.

There's one local VOR (forget which) where every time I enter its identifier, my 530W gives me a choice between the one I mean, about 50 miles away, and one in France. I don't really see the problem here. Of course if you select the wrong one, you may fly into a mountain, or run out of fuel mid-Atlantic. But then that's true if you just enter the wrong identifier too.

n5296s
 

You are quite correct with the VOR that you state...... the distance in not plauseable the problem is that a number of radio aids within a few miles of each other have the same ident.

This did not matter in the old days when one was a VOR one a DME and One an ADF because you can't tune a DME using your ADF, the problem in Europe is you can put an ident into an area nav and it is likely to send you to the wrong place, especially if the distance is plausible.

I thought the issue is that even to fly IFR legally in some countries, you have to have ADF? Even if nothing you are planning to do uses it. I remember that a few years back, IFR in Germany required not just ADF but either two of them or one with a flip-flop frequency change, presumably so you could safely identify a fix by NDB intersections. No idea whether Germany has crept into the 21st century yet, but I'll bet there are countries that haven't.

You mean the same country has say an NDB and a VOR close to each other and with the same identifier? That really is madness but I suppose what is, is.

Problem is that regardless of what the xAA says, the danger is there already. I'm sure there are lots of people flying by GPS who never tune a VOR or NDB, regardless of what the rules say, even if they do have the equipment. Moral of the story is to look carefully when your navigator says "do you mean XXX Little Snorington VOR or XXX Greater Snorington NDB?".

In the world of FMSs, the NDB is obsolete - not so the DME. DME/DME updating is very accurate, particularly if 3 stations are in good geometry. I would opine, it is still a valuable back-up to GNSS.

Mary Had + Roast Beef = Mary Barfed

Sooner they do away with ADF's the better, made studying for my IR rating a nightmare.

The last non training NDB approach in IMC conditions I flew where I did not use GPS track information to attain and maintain the NDB final approach track was in 1994.

Before 1994 I would break out with the needle showing on track and the runway was seldom directly in front of me. After 1994 the flight path of the airplane was always lined up with the centerline of the runway and the continuous distance information and ground speed made descent planning and accurately locating the MAP much better and safer

Now that there are few good rock and roll AM radio stations left, the ADF is truly useless.

I'm kind of amazed that anyone has ever found a runway using an NDB approach. It's just simple arithmetic - if you take a classic NDB approach with an NDB say 5 miles off the end of the runway, used first as an IAF, then a procedure turn then as the FAF with a 5 mile segment post-NDB. Let's say that your compass is accurate to 1 degree (trying not to laugh here) and you can fly to an accuracy of 1 degree also. Then the mean error is about 1 degree. So 5 miles from the NDB, your mean misalignment with the runway is about 5*6080*(1/57) - about 500 feet. Now use realistic compass accuracy and flying skill and you'll be lucky if you're within 1000 feet.

Actually on my IR checkride I flew an NDB (there were still some back then) and DID have the runway on the nose. I was quite pleased with myself, but it's pure luck.