IFR GPS replace DME / ADF?

[[email protected]]

Hello,

I'm new to IFR and just learning... if our plane doesn't have an ADF or
a DME... can we legally use, say a garmin 430, to do a NDB approach?
Also, can these garmin 430/480/530 units get you the DME?

Also, are RNAVs still used often?

Thanks,

-dr

[Ian Taylor]

An IFR certifed GPS can replace a NDB or DME waypoint or fix, but you can
not use it to do an NDB or DME arc approach. That being said, there will
probably be aGPS approach similar to the NDB approach at whatever airport
you go to.
The GARMIN 430/530/480 can get you a distance to a waypoint that will be
very close to a DME distance (remember DME measures slant height, GPS
measures lateral distance)

A NON IFR GPS can NOT legaly replace a NDB or DME fix.

RNAV's are still used. There are a lot of installed KNS-80's out there :)

Hope that helps.
Ian

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Hello,
>
> I'm new to IFR and just learning... if our plane doesn't have an ADF or
> a DME... can we legally use, say a garmin 430, to do a NDB approach?
> Also, can these garmin 430/480/530 units get you the DME?
>
> Also, are RNAVs still used often?
>
> Thanks,
>
> -dr
>

[[email protected]]

Thanks Ian!

[Mark Hansen]

On 05/06/06 17:35, wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm new to IFR and just learning... if our plane doesn't have an ADF or
> a DME... can we legally use, say a garmin 430, to do a NDB approach?

No. However, there are only a few cases where the GPS cannot be used
to identify an NDB or for DME. There is a section in the AIM that
talks about this. Look for a section called "Use of GPS in lieu of ADF/DME"
or something similar.


> Also, can these garmin 430/480/530 units get you the DME?

It's not really DME, since DME is the actual distance to the station,
including the vertical distance (slant range) while the GPS will show
distance from/to a way point assuming no vertical distance.

For most purposes, this difference can be ignored, and the GPS
distance can be used in lieu of DME (again, see the AIM for the
exceptions).

Another point about GPS "distances" is that it generally provides
distance to the selected way point. This is not always the ground
station from which you would be receiving a DME signal.

>
> Also, are RNAVs still used often?

GPS is RNAV, so yes.
There are also other types of RNAV...

>
> Thanks,
>
> -dr
>



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

[Robert M. Gary]

Some NDB approachs now say NDB/GPS. If it does not say GPS you cannot
use the GPS past the FAF. Its a bit silly that you must turn away from
your highly correct source (GPS) and turn to your ADF.

[Newps]

> On 05/06/06 17:35, wrote:
>
>>Hello,
>>
>>I'm new to IFR and just learning... if our plane doesn't have an ADF or
>>a DME... can we legally use, say a garmin 430, to do a NDB approach?
>
>
> No.

Why not? If you'll go direct with a handheld then why not shoot an NDB
approach with an IFR certified panel mount GPS such as a 430?

[Mark Hansen]

On 05/07/06 07:08, Newps wrote:
>
>> On 05/06/06 17:35, wrote:
>>
>>>Hello,
>>>
>>>I'm new to IFR and just learning... if our plane doesn't have an ADF or
>>>a DME... can we legally use, say a garmin 430, to do a NDB approach?
>>
>>
>> No.
>
> Why not? If you'll go direct with a handheld then why not shoot an NDB
> approach with an IFR certified panel mount GPS such as a 430?

The AIM section on use of GPS in lieu of NDB/DME explains why.

Now, if the NDB approach includes a GPS overlay, that's different.
The question was not about an NDB (GPS) approach, but an NDB approach.


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

[Newps]

Mark Hansen wrote:
> On 05/07/06 07:08, Newps wrote:
>
>>>On 05/06/06 17:35, wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I'm new to IFR and just learning... if our plane doesn't have an ADF or
>>>>a DME... can we legally use, say a garmin 430, to do a NDB approach?
>>>
>>>
>>>No.
>>
>>Why not? If you'll go direct with a handheld then why not shoot an NDB
>>approach with an IFR certified panel mount GPS such as a 430?
>
>
> The AIM section on use of GPS in lieu of NDB/DME explains why.
>
> Now, if the NDB approach includes a GPS overlay, that's different.
> The question was not about an NDB (GPS) approach, but an NDB approach.



"Tower, this will be a low approach only."

[Travis Marlatte]

But I sure would, while using my ADF as primary, use my GPS for situational
awareness. Meaning that I would tune and verify my ADF and watch the needle
stay where it should while following the track on the GPS.

--
-------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK
"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Some NDB approachs now say NDB/GPS. If it does not say GPS you cannot
> use the GPS past the FAF. Its a bit silly that you must turn away from
> your highly correct source (GPS) and turn to your ADF.
>

[Dave Butler]

Newps wrote:

> Why not? If you'll go direct with a handheld then why not shoot an NDB
> approach with an IFR certified panel mount GPS such as a 430?

For one reason, the approach won't be in the GPS database.

[Newps]

Dave Butler wrote:
> Newps wrote:
>
>> Why not? If you'll go direct with a handheld then why not shoot an
>> NDB approach with an IFR certified panel mount GPS such as a 430?
>
>
> For one reason, the approach won't be in the GPS database.

So what? Set the GPS direct to the NDB. Fly outbound, do a procedure
turn. Turn inbound, fly back over the NDB and land. Why would that be
remotely difficult?

[Greg Farris]

In article . com>,
says...
>
>
>Hello,
>
>I'm new to IFR and just learning... if our plane doesn't have an ADF or
>a DME... can we legally use, say a garmin 430, to do a NDB approach?
>Also, can these garmin 430/480/530 units get you the DME?
>
>Also, are RNAVs still used often?
>
>Thanks,
>
>-dr
>


The GPS/ADF question has also been discussed to death in a recent thread
here.

As for RNAV, you have to be careful using that word (or acronym) today,
because it is used to indicate older integrator boxes (KNS-80 etc) but
also applies to the latest GPS applications. The international B-RNAV and
P-RNAV standards do not preclude any of the navigational sources (VOR/DME
GPS) but specify performance standards. A GPS approach, even with WAAS or
LAAS is an RNAV approach by definition.

GF

[Dave Butler]

Newps wrote:

>> For one reason, the approach won't be in the GPS database.
>
>
> So what? Set the GPS direct to the NDB. Fly outbound, do a procedure
> turn. Turn inbound, fly back over the NDB and land. Why would that be
> remotely difficult?

Wouldn't be.

[[email protected]]

Hello everyone,

I just wanted to post that the Initial poster is using a canadian email
address and the rules in canada are a little bit different with regards
to the use of a GPS to fly a DME arc.

In Canada AIC 27/05 says:

6.0 Use of GNSS in Lieu of Ground-based Aids GNSS may be used to
identify all fixes defined by distance measuring equipment (DME), VOR,
VOR/DME and NDB, including fixes that are part of any instrument
approach procedure, to navigate to and from these fixes along specific
tracks, including arcs, and to report distances along airways or tracks
for separation purposes, subject to the following conditions:


Regards,

If you are looking for canadian rules, I strongly suggest that you
refer to Transport Canada website.

[[email protected]]

Thanks!

[Robert M. Gary]

> For one reason, the approach won't be in the GPS database

That's not true of any IFR GPS I've used. They usually have all
approaches, ILS, NDB, etc regardless if they are GPS or not. On the
Garmin you do get a warning though.

-Robert

[Sam Spade]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> Some NDB approachs now say NDB/GPS. If it does not say GPS you cannot
> use the GPS past the FAF. Its a bit silly that you must turn away from
> your highly correct source (GPS) and turn to your ADF.
>

Virtually all FAA NDB approaches are NDB (GPS) unless an RNAV (GPS)
approach provides the same, or better, access. Once the RNAV approach
becomes effective, the GPS overlay for the NDB is cancelled.

[Sam Spade]

Greg Farris wrote:

> In article . com>,
> says...
>
>>
>>Hello,
>>
>>I'm new to IFR and just learning... if our plane doesn't have an ADF or
>>a DME... can we legally use, say a garmin 430, to do a NDB approach?
>>Also, can these garmin 430/480/530 units get you the DME?
>>
>>Also, are RNAVs still used often?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>-dr
>>
>
>
>
> The GPS/ADF question has also been discussed to death in a recent thread
> here.
>
> As for RNAV, you have to be careful using that word (or acronym) today,
> because it is used to indicate older integrator boxes (KNS-80 etc) but
> also applies to the latest GPS applications. The international B-RNAV and
> P-RNAV standards do not preclude any of the navigational sources (VOR/DME
> GPS) but specify performance standards. A GPS approach, even with WAAS or
> LAAS is an RNAV approach by definition.
>
> GF
>
Then, there is RNP.

[Bob Noel]

In article <JwR8g.176188$bm6.47778@fed1read04>, Sam Spade >
wrote:

> > As for RNAV, you have to be careful using that word (or acronym) today,
> > because it is used to indicate older integrator boxes (KNS-80 etc) but
> > also applies to the latest GPS applications. The international B-RNAV and
> > P-RNAV standards do not preclude any of the navigational sources (VOR/DME
> > GPS) but specify performance standards. A GPS approach, even with WAAS or
> > LAAS is an RNAV approach by definition.
> >
> > GF
> >
> Then, there is RNP.

Which is sometimes considered different than RNP RNAV (e.g., RNP with
containment integrity).

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Sam Spade]

Bob Noel wrote:

> In article <JwR8g.176188$bm6.47778@fed1read04>, Sam Spade >
> wrote:
>
>
>>>As for RNAV, you have to be careful using that word (or acronym) today,
>>>because it is used to indicate older integrator boxes (KNS-80 etc) but
>>>also applies to the latest GPS applications. The international B-RNAV and
>>>P-RNAV standards do not preclude any of the navigational sources (VOR/DME
>>>GPS) but specify performance standards. A GPS approach, even with WAAS or
>>>LAAS is an RNAV approach by definition.
>>>
>>>GF
>>>
>>
>>Then, there is RNP.
>
>
> Which is sometimes considered different than RNP RNAV (e.g., RNP with
> containment integrity).
>

How about RNAV (RNP) instrument approach procedure?

[L. R. Du Broff]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in news:1147388011.887947.25520
@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

>> For one reason, the approach won't be in the GPS database
>
> That's not true of any IFR GPS I've used. They usually have all
> approaches, ILS, NDB, etc regardless if they are GPS or not. On the
> Garmin you do get a warning though.
>
> -Robert
>
>

I don't believe that the GX-50 / GX-60 units have any approaches other than
GPS (no ILS, no LOC, no SDF, no VOR, no NDB, unless they have GPS
overlays).

[Sam Spade]

L. R. Du Broff wrote:

> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote in news:1147388011.887947.25520
> @j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>>>For one reason, the approach won't be in the GPS database
>>
>>That's not true of any IFR GPS I've used. They usually have all
>>approaches, ILS, NDB, etc regardless if they are GPS or not. On the
>>Garmin you do get a warning though.
>>
>>-Robert
>>
>>
>
>
> I don't believe that the GX-50 / GX-60 units have any approaches other than
> GPS (no ILS, no LOC, no SDF, no VOR, no NDB, unless they have GPS
> overlays).

The Garmin 400/500 series do. Can't speak for any of the others.