Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

NDB Continuation - an abuse of power?

huv wrote:

It would not. The NDB/ADF system is explicitly excluded from PBN (performance based navigation). If fails on monitoring (ADF) and probably other requirements as well.

@huv. He knows that. He means with modern obstacle and Nav accuracy criteria.

EGTK Oxford

Sone geek at my local airfield rebuilt their NDB using modern electronics and the CAA approved it. Cost very little and it’s great now.

I’m surprised he’s not posted on these forum’s.

RobertL18C wrote:

if NDB approaches would even be approved using modern RNP standards, or are they allowed on a grandfather rights basis?

Re. the last part of the question: While an NDB would never be approved using “RNP standards”, they are allowed like they always have been. They are just not PBN, that’s all. I don’t think there is any grandfathering involved; I see no reason why a new NDB approach procedure could not be developed and approved in the same way they always have. It is all good old Doc 8168 territory, as is obstacle clearance and inherent navigation accuracy. RNP (and PBN) is not globally applied, just a new specification applicable to certain new procedures and airways.

Last Edited by huv at 21 Jan 19:17
huv
EKRK, Denmark

Looks like it’ll be worth holding on to that ADF and keeping those skills honed.

https://www.faasafety.gov/files/notices/2020/Jan/CSG4_20-01_GPS_Flight_Advisory.pdf local copy

Anything that happens in the US, we usually catch after a short while. Just like the weather.

United Kingdom

onfinal wrote:

Looks like it’ll be worth holding on to that ADF and keeping those skills honed.

https://www.faasafety.gov/files/notices/2020/Jan/CSG4_20-01_GPS_Flight_Advisory.pdf local copy

Anything that happens in the US, we usually catch after a short while. Just like the weather.

The US military has been doing this for years. I think the “may result” is a CYA thing. If these exercises really caused any notable GPS interference to civil aviation outside of restricted areas they would never be allowed to have them.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Out of interest whey hasn’t easa allowed GPS substitution for NDB approaches? Am I correct in thinking that the FAA did this some decades ago?

The explanation I was given many years ago was that GPS is not always more accurate than the NDB/ADF, so in some circumstances obstacle clearance could be compromised if substituting ADF with a GPS. He (someone from the Authority?) said that with a straight face but I never understood how that could be true. At least not after NavStar turned off Selective Availability back in 2000.

Last Edited by huv at 22 Jan 11:21
huv
EKRK, Denmark

I agree. There is no possible honest answer to that one.

Especially as the US allowed it many years ago and long before WAAS.

European regulators have come out with some real gems. I recall one EU guy – I think it was somebody going by the name of Seebohm – saying “We are Europeans, we need European regulation, not American regulation”. You need a massive dose of blind arrogance real balls to say stuff like that, to an intelligent audience.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I’ve only used ADF twice: once when I thought I’d better learn how to use it, and once when the VOR receiver wasn’t working.

Someone recently told me they only keep their ADF to listen to the baseball on cross-countries . He also said commercial AM stations have a range many times that of NDBs which they used ‘in the old days’ for navigating to big cities. Does anyone still do this?

EGHO-LFQF-KCLW, United Kingdom

I used to use BBC local radio station which was a couple of miles from my house as an NDB until I changed my little aeroplane about 3 or 4 years ago. The replacement aircraft doesn’t have an ADF. It does however have 2 GPS receivers

Darley Moor, Gamston (UK)
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top