At North Bend airport in Oregon, to do an ILS approach you have to have an ADF. Last year I am pretty sure it was not required. I want the experts here to check it out and inform me.
http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1402/00929IL4.PDF

Are they putting ADF's in new business jets?

Tim

I have not flown a plane that had ADF since 2005. The guy I fly for part time does not have any in his planes.

qmdv wrote:At North Bend airport in Oregon, to do an ILS approach you have to have an ADF. Last year I am pretty sure it was not required. I want the experts here to check it out and inform me.
http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1402/00929IL4.PDF

Are they putting ADF's in new business jets?

Tim

IFR approved GPS can be substituted for ADF in any approach except for a pure NDB approach. Nobody is installing ADF, and there's no need to.

In this type approach, the NDB is used to identify a point, in this case, the missed approach fix...and as long as ADF is still approved you can use either ADF or GPS.

And a LOT of folks are installing IFR approved GPS.

MTV

GPS can be used to identify any crossing fix on an instrument approach. No ADF required for this approach, you can use a marker beacon receiver (now that's something I haven't seen on a panel in long time - didn't know they still existed), or an ADF, or a VOR/DME, or a GPS. I believe the required navaids are listed on the top right, and in bold font in the plan view, at least in Jeppesen. Must be some hills to the east as the DH/MDH limits are variable depending on whether or not you can maintain a climb gradient, and the RNP .11 approach has a spiral left missed. Any of you guys flying multi worry about a missed approach gradient, or do you figure that an engine failure combined with a missed approach is statistically not going to happen.

I have a good King KR87 ADF in my airplane, and for an approach in which the LOM is an IAF, it's a whole lot easier to use the separate ADF than to do the knob twisting necessary to use the same GPS box for the approach which you're also using it for the ILS.

On this particular approach, let's assume that you were coming from the east toward OTH VOR at 6000'. As you're almost there, you're cleared for the ILS 4 approach. Assuming you've had the OT NDB tuned in on the ADF, you just turn the airplane to center the needle to fly to the OT LOM, with your GPS/VOR tuned to the I-OTH ILS. When the ILS comes alive, you turn outbound on the ILS, start down from 6000' to do the procedure turn, and come back in onto the iLS. As soon as the ADF reverses, you tell Tower that you're Emire inbound. Meanwhile, you've watched the distance on either the GPS or DME so that you waited to do the procedure turn until you were at 2000' and started descending to 1000' as soon as you're wings level out of the procedure turn, to intercept the glideslope before you get to OT LOM.

But do it again, this time without an ADF. You're almost to OTH VOR when you are cleared for the approach. Yeah, you can tune in the LOM location on the GPS, but that means switching it from the VOR to GPS and then back to VOR again to intercept the ILS. Not too difficult, but more difficult than if you have an ADF.

Now try to do it without a GPS or ADF or DME. All you have is navcoms. You are cleared direct to the LOM before you get to OTH. That's the IAF, so you have to get there somehow. The only way that comes to mind to do it accurately is to continue to OTH, then turn on the outbound 241 radial until it intersects with the ILS, then turn outbound on the ILS. That's fine if you have 2 working navcoms, but involves a whole lot of knob twisting if you only have one. If you have a marker beacon receiver, you'll know when you've arrived in the vicinity of the LOM, but if you don't (and it's not a requirement), you have no way of identifying the LOM, outbound or inbound, other than by centering the 241 radial on a navcom.

So while the approach probably could be flown with only a navcom or two, having an ADF would make it much easier and safer. Perhaps the "safer" part is why it's required along with a DME (or an approach certified GPS in lieu of the ADF & DME).

Cary

Cary wrote:I have a good King KR87 ADF in my airplane, and for an approach in which the LOM is an IAF, it's a whole lot easier to use the separate ADF than to do the knob twisting necessary to use the same GPS box for the approach which you're also using it for the ILS.

On this particular approach, let's assume that you were coming from the east toward OTH VOR at 6000'. As you're almost there, you're cleared for the ILS 4 approach. Assuming you've had the OT NDB tuned in on the ADF, you just turn the airplane to center the needle to fly to the OT LOM, with your GPS/VOR tuned to the I-OTH ILS. When the ILS comes alive, you turn outbound on the ILS, start down from 6000' to do the procedure turn, and come back in onto the iLS. As soon as the ADF reverses, you tell Tower that you're Emire inbound. Meanwhile, you've watched the distance on either the GPS or DME so that you waited to do the procedure turn until you were at 2000' and started descending to 1000' as soon as you're wings level out of the procedure turn, to intercept the glideslope before you get to OT LOM.

But do it again, this time without an ADF. You're almost to OTH VOR when you are cleared for the approach. Yeah, you can tune in the LOM location on the GPS, but that means switching it from the VOR to GPS and then back to VOR again to intercept the ILS. Not too difficult, but more difficult than if you have an ADF.

Now try to do it without a GPS or ADF or DME. All you have is navcoms. You are cleared direct to the LOM before you get to OTH. That's the IAF, so you have to get there somehow. The only way that comes to mind to do it accurately is to continue to OTH, then turn on the outbound 241 radial until it intersects with the ILS, then turn outbound on the ILS. That's fine if you have 2 working navcoms, but involves a whole lot of knob twisting if you only have one. If you have a marker beacon receiver, you'll know when you've arrived in the vicinity of the LOM, but if you don't (and it's not a requirement), you have no way of identifying the LOM, outbound or inbound, other than by centering the 241 radial on a navcom.

So while the approach probably could be flown with only a navcom or two, having an ADF would make it much easier and safer. Perhaps the "safer" part is why it's required along with a DME (or an approach certified GPS in lieu of the ADF & DME).

Cary

Again, one of the primary reason this is ADF required is that the missed approach fix is an NDB.

And, if you fly much actual, you REALLY need to dump that King box and get one of the Garmin IFR "all in one" radios.....430/530 or the newer touchscreen types. I tell people even I can fly IFR with one of those....

MTV

mtv wrote:Again, one of the primary reason this is ADF required is that the missed approach fix is an NDB.

And, if you fly much actual, you REALLY need to dump that King box and get one of the Garmin IFR "all in one" radios.....430/530 or the newer touchscreen types. I tell people even I can fly IFR with one of those....

MTV

Agreed. That and to fix the MSA I think.

Lol at your Garmin comment! In a completely unaffordable way, I feel the same about the Proline 21 system! Hahaha!

I have had a 430W since May 2012, FWIW. Just saying it's easier to fly an ILS approach which has a LOM as part of the approach by using the ADF.

But I totally "missed" that the missed approach is what requires the NDB--mea culpa.

Cary

"Direct" is not a consideration for equipment requirements, when the designers get done writing an approach all that counts is what they put down on paper. er, computer. The ability to go direct is just a bonus.
DME is required to identify LEAST and ADF is required for the missed approach.
In the US and most of the civilized world GPS can substitute for either, but there are still parts of the world where ADF is required. It is still being installed on aircraft that may end up in timbuktu.

Some folks feel that your portable Garmin is very helpful in aiding situational awareness during a procedure requiring ADF as part of an ILS, while the IFR GPS is displaying the ILS.

I'm with Cary on the comfort and safety of an electronic devise that does only one thing, and does it very well. I have flown a lot of hard IMC in Army helicopters with only one navigation devise, the ADF. I was a lot more comfortable than today instructing a young student who can physically and mentally handle the small buttons and can do everything capability of the new computerized electronics. I just can't trust myself to have gone through the long and involved steps in the right order every time. I would rather rely on a needle that always points to the station.

So if you had two vor's allowing you to toggle your dme over to the alternative hold fix on a miss, would that still require an adf?

Nosedragger wrote:So if you had two vor's allowing you to toggle your dme over to the alternative hold fix on a miss, would that still require an adf?

Yes.....again, the missed approach fix is an NDB. There's no provision in the regs for substitution of VOR for ADF.

MTV

mtv wrote:

Nosedragger wrote:So if you had two vor's allowing you to toggle your dme over to the alternative hold fix on a miss, would that still require an adf?

Yes.....again, the missed approach fix is an NDB. There's no provision in the regs for substitution of VOR for ADF.

MTV

On my phone now, but I'm pretty sure there was an alternate fix for the hold dme distance from a radial.
Never mind, I confused myself.

There is an alternate missed: YICBU off the VOR. But there's no guarantee you'll get that missed even if you request it. You may get stuck with the published missed due to traffic or other considerations.

CamTom12 wrote:There is an alternate missed: YICBU off the VOR. But there's no guarantee you'll get that missed even if you request it. You may get stuck with the published missed due to traffic or other considerations.

Is that one of those you have to get the controller to read the procedure to you in order to use it?

Yeah, you'd get given either "the published missed" or "alternate missed approach instructions." They most likely use the alternate often enough that they put it on the plate, but the primary missed is still the primary and should be expected when you initiate the approach unless instructed otherwise!

Steady snow outside, so lots of time to ponder threads such as this one.

There is no ADF required for this approach and I'd be happy to fly it with an FAA inspector beside me without an ADF. The missed approach hold point can be identified several different ways, GPS, DME/VOR, LOM along the localizer, or yes, finally ADF. ATC doesn't particularly care how you find it.

This airport is not my turf, but in general nobody flies a missed all the way to a hold waypoint. That's for a comm failure and a lack of foresight. If you think you might miss you'll get a missed approach clearance before heading down, usually either vectors for a second approach or enroute to your alternate. Frankly I'd feel kind of stupid missing and then going to a hold waypoint. At least on this approach it's nice and close, on some approaches it's 30 miles away, in a direction you have no desire to go.

It should also say $15 is also required if you decide to land and don't go missed and use your ADF. Too bad Bandon doesn't have an RNAV.

Karmutzen wrote:Steady snow outside, so lots of time to ponder threads such as this one.

There is no ADF required for this approach and I'd be happy to fly it with an FAA inspector beside me without an ADF. The missed approach hold point can be identified several different ways, GPS, DME/VOR, LOM along the localizer, or yes, finally ADF. ATC doesn't particularly care how you find it.

This airport is not my turf, but in general nobody flies a missed all the way to a hold waypoint. That's for a comm failure and a lack of foresight. If you think you might miss you'll get a missed approach clearance before heading down, usually either vectors for a second approach or enroute to your alternate. Frankly I'd feel kind of stupid missing and then going to a hold waypoint. At least on this approach it's nice and close, on some approaches it's 30 miles away, in a direction you have no desire to go.

It's called "Hold as published" When ATC is busy as hell and just wants to park you for a bit.....been there (holding) and got that instruction from ATC. And, you're right...ATC doesn't care how you figure out where the fix is....a portable GPS will get you there in fact. BUT, Flight Standards does care.....and they're the ones with teeth.

MTV