Do I need DME or ADF in an IFR-certified GPS panel?

Thomas Borchert wrote:

but how many would there be where the GPS could not legally replace the
DME? Those are only the very few where the DME is not in the database.

It's my understanding that the DME box in the plane measures distance from a
VOR. All VORs should be in the database.

George Patterson
Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
Because she smells like a new truck.

Doug wrote:

Also, I think Marker Beacons are nice to have,
though not legally required for ILS's. It is good to have that aural
warning at the middle marker.

IIRC, there are also approaches that have lower minimums for the ILS with an MBR
than without.

George Patterson
Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
Because she smells like a new truck.

On 6/8/2005 09:51, George Patterson wrote:

Thomas Borchert wrote:

but how many would there be where the GPS could not legally replace the
DME? Those are only the very few where the DME is not in the database.

It's my understanding that the DME box in the plane measures distance from a
VOR. All VORs should be in the database.

Actually, it measures distance from a DME or TACAN facility, not from
a VOR. It can use a VOR/DME or VORTAC, but not a VOR.


George Patterson
Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
Because she smells like a new truck.


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Student
Sacramento, CA

Matt Barrow wrote:

One I do fairly often is SDA GPS 12, which is a VOR/DME overlay.
Another is Laramie (WY) Rwy 30.



It doesn't require DME if you're going to fly it GPS.
The name of that appoach is
VOR/DME or GPS 12

Thomas Borchert wrote:
Matt,


My guess is that you'll
find more GPS approaches that require DME than require ADF.



but how many would there be where the GPS could not legally replace the
DME? Those are only the very few where the DME is not in the database.


There are no GPS appraoches that require DME period. It's not a
matter of "replacing" it.

The only issue is using GPS to substitute for DME on NON-GPS
approaches. You can do that if you have the fix AND this isn't
the non-GPS required alternate.

George Patterson wrote:
Thomas Borchert wrote:


but how many would there be where the GPS could not legally replace
the DME? Those are only the very few where the DME is not in the
database.


It's my understanding that the DME box in the plane measures distance
from a VOR. All VORs should be in the database.

There are ILS based DME's. The issue isn't GPS appraoches, it's
using a GPS to substitute for DME on another non-GPS approach.

Roy Smith wrote:


Looking closer at this approach, I'm a little confused why the OVR
13 DME (CFDKH) fix exists. There's no course change. The MDA is the
same before and after. There's no timer to start. Why is the segment
after Omaha VOR not simply "2800 NoPT to PICAM"?



It's to let you know you're inside the circle :-)

George Patterson wrote:
Doug wrote:


Also, I think Marker Beacons are nice to have,
though not legally required for ILS's. It is good to have that aural
warning at the middle marker.


IIRC, there are also approaches that have lower minimums for the ILS
with an MBR than without.

It used to be that there was a penalty for no middle marker. This was
done away with almost a decade ago. The FAA doesn't take markers
seriously anymore. Unless it's a compass locator with some other
navigational function, they're pretty much ignored.

Frank Stutzman wrote:


Yup, a big advantage of the 480 over the 430/530.

Has anyone ever attempted to get a FMS approved for a 430/530 that has
verbage like the 480 so that you could still do an approach with an
expired DB?

Not with any FSDO around here for sure. I've even got the stupid
GPS/VOR annunciators because my 480 is three inches too far to the
right to qualify for the exemption.

On 6/8/05 09:17, "Matt Barrow" wrote:


"No Spam" wrote in message
...
On 6/7/05 22:35, "Matt Barrow" wrote:

The ADF is no big deal, but definitely keep the DME. My guess is that
you'll
find more GPS approaches that require DME than require ADF.



Thanks, Matt,

I had no idea that any GPS approaches existed that required DME - guess
that
would make them "GPS-DME" approaches. Can you name some?

One I do fairly often is SDA GPS 12, which is a VOR/DME overlay.
Another is Laramie (WY) Rwy 30.



Matt,

Those approaches can be flown with only the GPS - a DME isn't required. If
you flew them without a GPS, then you'd need the VOR/DME combination.

- Don
Life is just what happens to you,
While you're busy making other plans
"Beautiful boy" - John Lennon