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

Jon Kraus wrote:
KUMP in Indianapolis transmits AWOS over their NDB on channel 338.


And neither FSS or Approach can get it for you?

"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.

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...
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.



What GPS approaches would EVER require DME?

Sorry, not what I wanted to say. It's not that the GPS approach requires
DME, but that it gives more/better options than a ADF.

The only thing a DME lets you do is fly a non-GPS approach if
it required it. This is only useful if you want to fly to
places using a GPS-based approach and your only available
alternate requires DME.

No,

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


You can replace ALL DMEs required with the GPS as long as the DME is in the
database. The distinction is important for airfields where the aerodrome
reference point (which is always in the database) is not identical with the
position of the DME used for the approach - which is often.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

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.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Nathan,

I believe
other countries still require ADF either for IFR flight or for many of
the approaches.


DME required for IFR here in Germany - and ADF in training aircraft. Big
problem for Cirrus, which doesn't have the panel space for another box.
They will sell you some kind of remote DME box, as I udnerstand it.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Matt Barrow wrote:
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.

To fly this approach you need either (VOR and DME) or GPS. If you're
flying it with a GPS, you don't need a DME. It's really just for
convenience that they put them both on the same chart.

In article , Roy Smith wrote:
Matt Barrow wrote:
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.

To fly this approach you need either (VOR and DME) or GPS. If you're
flying it with a GPS, you don't need a DME. It's really just for
convenience that they put them both on the same chart.

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"?

There is, in fact, a requirement to be able to fly the approach at your
alternate without the use of GPS. So having DME will assist you in
finding legal alternates that have VOR/DME approaches. This will allow
you to carry less fuel and more payload. Without DME or ADF, all you
can fly is a VOR approach, and if you have radar, an ILS or LOC (maybe
a few obscure others). Even then some ILS's require DME or ADF.

DME is a nice option to have with an IFR GPS VOR/GS setup. But you can
get by without it. 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.

Ron Natalie wrote:
Frank Stutzman wrote:


There are a considerable number of GPS approaches that are overlays of NDB
approaches. Normally, you would use the improved percision of the GPS and
fly it that way. Now the 430/530 requires that your database be current
in order to legally fly an approach (at least with the AFMS that I have).

My 480 FMS only requires me to know the approach info is right.
Of course the real answer is if you're going to fly IFR, you're going
to have to keep your NAVDATA (charts, GPS databases, etc... up to date).

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?

--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Hood River, OR