NDB approaches -- what are they good for?

David Megginson wrote
Doesn't loss of control on the landing roll account for a
disproportionately large number of accidents, even for Cherokees and
Skyhawks?

Disproportionately large? I don't know about that. I know there are
VERY few fatal landing accidents.

Michael

In article , David Megginson
writes:

Look at how many pilots fly just fine for years without really
learning to use the rudder or make full stall landings.

Doesn't loss of control on the landing roll account for a
disproportionately large number of accidents, even for Cherokees and
Skyhawks?

When learning to fly a sailplane in Tucson, the instructor commented that the
A10 pilots that came up from Davis Monthan AF thought that the rudder pedals
were welded to the floor. With a sailplane you sure get adverse yaw and need
rudder.

Chuck

Michael wrote:

David Megginson wrote
I think that the only way that a LOC or VOR approach would be
significantly easier than an NDB approach is if you were chasing the
needle: if you chase the CDI in a VOR or LOC approach, you still stay
close to track (in a constant series of S-turns); if you chase the NDB
needle, you end up approaching the NDB downwind from the track.

You got it. The other difference - with the NDB, you absolutely must
keep the DG (if available) on the correct compass heading.

I'm getting a mental picture of someone unfamiliar with how the ADF works
trying to fly an NDB approach traveling forever in circles around the
beacon.

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon writes:

I'm getting a mental picture of someone unfamiliar with how the ADF works
trying to fly an NDB approach traveling forever in circles around the
beacon.

At least they'd be near the airport when they finally ran out of fuel.


All the best,


David

--
David Megginson, , http://www.megginson.com/