Legal or not?

Dave Butler wrote:
Brad wrote:

Rick McPherson wrote:

On Aug 28 I was practicing approaches at KAGC (FEW 008 BKN 012 OVR
025 4SM
BR). My preflight brief indicated that the McKeesport NDB is out of
service.
Yet, the ATIS identified runway 28 as active and we were given the
ILS 28
approach for practice (upon request). Is this approach legal without the
beacon?



No, unless you have a IFR certified GPS receiver(TSO C129 or TSO
C145/146a). "ADF Required" is written on chart, so you must have a
means of navigating to the NDB. If you were practicing the procedure
under VFR, then yes you were legal.


http://download.aopa.org/ustprocs/20...ils_rwy_28.pdf

As a side note, is the equipment that you fly still using ADF?



No XM on board, so it does serve minimal enroute entertainment value.
Not many NDB's or procedures left where I fly.


Does anyone besides me think the note should read "ADF OR RADAR REQUIRED"?

It appears that would be an appropriate note since there is an approach
control identified on the plate. Presumably they could provide vectors,
but may not have good enough radar coverage in that area, not have the
necessary depictions on the video map, or the minimum vectoring altitude
is too high.

JPH